Is An Alien Message Embedded in Our Genetic Code ?

[southerncross]

This is being given a serious look.

http://news.discovery.com/space/alien-life-exoplanets/could-an-alien-message-be-embedded-in-our-genetic-code-130401.htm

ALIEN LIFE & EXOPLANETS
Is An Alien Message Embedded In Our Genetic Code?
APR 1, 2013 11:27 AM ET // BY RAY VILLARD

[majicbar]

With so much of the genome considered "junk" long stings of psuedocode could easily reside there and we would know nothing of it. I think it is well worth a serious look.

[atmjjc]

As humans we seem to become arrogant when it comes to research, why do we label such things in our language as ‘JUNK DNA’. Nothing in our biological makeup should be referred to as junk, it’s silly. Anyway it is so labeled so we must live with the term junk DNA.

One of great interest is the research coming out of Russia is about light and sound frequency modulation of the junk DNA as spare parts which when modulated can alter specie or change it to another specie so claim the Russian researchers, their names do escape me at the moment but they are well known in Russia. Their claims which have yet to be proven are they have already used this method of modulation to alter and change species. Whether this is bravado on their part or misinterpretations on our part are yet to be explained.

Of course their research does have a designer designation to it, but it can also shed light and give clues on how and maybe why the ET aliens are manipulating our specie.

[calikid]

This is being given a serious look.

http://news.discovery.com/space/alien-life-exoplanets/could-an-alien-message-be-embedded-in-our-genetic-code-130401.htm

ALIEN LIFE & EXOPLANETS
Is An Alien Message Embedded In Our Genetic Code?
APR 1, 2013 11:27 AM ET // BY RAY VILLARD

Interesting article. Almost reads like they are co-opting the religious belief of "Intelligent Design (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design)".
Simply substitute "God" where they have "master extraterrestrial civilization", and it then reads like Sunday school.

[calikid]

As humans we seem to become arrogant when it comes to research, why do we label such things in our language as ‘JUNK DNA’. Nothing in our biological makeup should be referred to as junk, it’s silly. Anyway it is so labeled so we must live with the term junk DNA.

<snip>.

Yes, labels do come up lacking sometime.
Like calling a plant a weed, just because no useful purpose has been discovered for it ..... yet!
Maybe we should call it Weed DNA. ;)
No useful purpose has been determined for Weed DNA.... yet. But there could be some future discovery just over the horizon (ie your mention of frequency modulation).

[atmjjc]

Yes, labels do come up lacking sometime.
Like calling a plant a weed, just because no useful purpose has been discovered for it ..... yet!
Maybe we should call it Weed DNA. ;)
No useful purpose has been determined for Weed DNA.... yet. But there could be some future discovery just over the horizon (ie your mention of frequency modulation).

Hmm…weed DNA…human spontaneous combustion comes to mind. :das

[atmjjc]

One of great interest is the research coming out of Russia is about light and sound frequency modulation of the junk DNA as spare parts which when modulated can alter specie or change it to another specie so claim the Russian researchers, their names do escape me at the moment


Memory now serves me.

Dr. Pjotr Garjajev, member of the Russian Academy of Sciences as well as the Academy of Sciences in New York. Dr. Garjajev is a a bio physicist and molecular biologist

An interesting read:

http://www.fosar-bludorf.com/archiv/biochip_eng.htm

[ka-lemtah]

Hello,

Chances are that if 'it' (genetics) were a message bearing 'code', Humans wouldn't be able to decipher it, due to the interspeciel incommensurabilities that likely exist. My very good friend of 30 years (who passed away three weeks ago), Dr. Sun Yeun Wong, (was director of the IBM Advanced Computational Design Lab [17yrs], and later, Chief scientist at Hughes RADAR Systems Group [30yrs], a title that embarrassed him), once while chatting, regarding interspeciel communications, strongly stated that we'd likely not be able to established dialogic interchange. The conversation was broached re; my luminous-orb experiments that I was doing at that time (cca 1998). I had fabricated an electronic experiment, initially, in an attempt to establish interactive contact with these mysterious phenomenon. His point was that unless there were some commonality between Humans and that of luminous-orbs (what ever these things are? Engineered mecha or intelligent life-form, etc), that it would be very unlikely that we could understand each other. Later, I changed the experiment goal, I dumbed-it-down considerably, afterwhich I was successful in initiating interactions. Doing so enabled **ANY** interaction to be loggable with luminous-orbs, which I was eventually able to accomplish. So, yes, I was able to make interactive contact, but I seldom knew (if ever?) what the interactions portended, and it was my 'code'.

ka-lemtah

[Longeyes]

Hi Ka-lemtah
Reckon your friend Dr Wong probably knew more than he was letting on. UFOs are constantly showing up on radar. But most communications seem to be telepathic or channeled and so they probably aren't going to respond to a primitive EM radiation which is limited by time and space.
The counter argument is that we still live in the same universe/reality and although our perceptions of that reality may be very different but there will always be common ground.
Any ET will need some energy/food/sustenance of some form. They will be as bound by the same physical laws as us. Some limited form of communication should be possible.
Orbs are possibly not entirely grounded in our physical universe which must make them much harder to communicate with.

Did you ever get any coherent message or sense of meaning from them?

[ka-lemtah]

Hi Ka-lemtah
Forum : Research Lab : Research and Investigations : Is An Alien Message Embedded in Our Genetic Code ?


Reckon your friend Dr Wong probably knew more than he was letting on.

UFOs are constantly showing up on radar. But most communications seem to be telepathic or channeled and so they probably aren't going to respond to a primitive EM radiation which is limited by time and space.

The counter argument is that we still live in the same universe/reality and although our perceptions of that reality may be very different but there will always be common ground.

Any ET will need some energy/food/sustenance of some form. They will be as bound by the same physical laws as us.

Some limited form of communication should be possible.

Orbs are possibly not entirely grounded in our physical universe which must make them much harder to communicate with.

Did you ever get any coherent message or sense of meaning from them?

Hello LongEyes,

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

I mentioned Sy's credentials...well partly because I miss my friend and his passing is on my mind much these days, and also, to briefly establish that Sy is..was a very smart guy.

>Dr Wong probably knew more than he was letting on.

That is certainly true.

Sy was a military RADAR development scientist. He expended many years developing and inventing new DSP (digital-signal-processor) systems to discriminate target-data from data-noise. Some modern military RADARs paint images of the target on the display screen, much like a gray-scale TV image, these RADARS employ scanned phased-array micro-strip antennae. Since Sy was not a RADAR technician nor an operator, he did not have access to deployed military RADAR data. He and I chatted quite a bit about RADAR principles, and I had access to an authentic, real live scientist...most Ph.D. are not, yet desire that others see them as such. Many Ph.D.s are simply well educated industrial engineers. To be a scientist, foremost one need be curious and be willing to follow the data-trail, to the extent that it takes them. Sy was such a person. Also, at that time, I was actively studying strategies for the detection of suspected alien objects, and since I had read a few technical books about RADAR principles I wasn't totally ignorant of the subject as many ET folks are, and do to this there existed a mutual base-line. As I recall, (about 15 years ago), he and I mainly chatted about topics relating to microwave generation; signal-locking (Sy held numerous Hughes AirCraft [HAC] patents relating to phase-lock & numerically-locked-loops that he invented while employed by HAC) and numerical strategies used to filter undesired data. Other subjects that we discussed included beam-coherence, impedance matching between waveguide and the feedhorn, atmospheric matching and much dialogue was related to power-spectral-density in 'chirps', etc. An importand and an interesting subject. However, and to be clear, while, in the later years, Sy did eventually chat a bit about alien subjects, initially, he no interest in the subject what-so-ever.

>UFOs are constantly showing up on radar.

It does seem that way, doesn't it?

However it is interesting to realize, that while RADAR has been functional since before World-War II, not many ET RADAR contact reports can actually be cited. I have heard of or read maybe six reports total? or seven? that occured during the span of appx 60 years? And most of those 'reports' were via scantily described in pre-1969 military personnel sighting reports, which contained descriptions such as, "I saw on my weapons RADAR two blips", etc. From this, how does the ET presence public believe that ET objects are 'constantly showing up on RADAR'? Its a reasonable assumption, to be sure, but since 1969 when the US Military began censoring personnel from disclosing ET RADAR detections, how many reports have there been? Yet the perception generally exists that ET are continually being RADAR detected. However, I suspect that this is a an unsupported-by-evidence public extrapolated as 'fact' myth.

There are many RADAR transceivers deployed the world over, --possibly 10,000 plus installations, and yet how many folks in the public have access to the data that those RADARs produce? Or have been alerted to possible ET RADAR detections during the past 44 years? Beyond possibly a handful of reports? Then, how many of those RADARs can even detect ET objects?

RADARs and their applications are as varied as vehicle types. Just as in screw-drivers and butter-knives, one can't use a jeep to cross an ocean expanse any more than a traffic-control RADAR can detect a non-transponder based airliner. Gotta use the correct tool for specific RADAR tasks. Most RADARs today are commercial RADARs and those have very limited detection scope. And today, the Western Militaries of the World do not share or disclose any object detections irregardless of whether they are terrestrial or otherwise, the public is just not-in-the-loop. Aside from the recent MUFON Stephenville RADAR analysis how many post 1969 ET object RADAR detection reports have there been? The Stephenville event does not really qualify, as it was not a RADAR detection event that caused the analysis, but rather, a theory by several MUFONites, who speculated that due to the proximal location of the Stephenville area between several overlapping airport approach RADARs (function via skin-paints), it was theorized those RADARs could be used to verify the presence and transit track of the relatively high-altitude (within RADAR approach slant-range limits) of the Stephenville ET object. And its not really clear, that they actually achieved that goal. It was a monumental task and the FAA did not help them, afterall, they are just publically salaried public servents, right? (doing as they phkn please)

So, how many RADAR detection reports can be cited since 1969 to support the public notion that ET objects are constantly being detected? I can cite six credible post Blue-Book period detections, not too many, but those are quite enough to give one a glimpse of what military RADARs are in fact detecting, even though it is an extrapolation.

>But most [ET] communications seem to be telepathic...so they probably aren't going to respond to a primitive EM radiation

RADAR can't generally be considered to be 'communication' per se, while it is true, from a strictly a classical perspective, that one may view commercial air-traffic control RADAR/transponder combination functionality as being a limited machine-to-machine communication configuration, but only in that one specific, hybrid application. Radio Detection And Ranging aka "RADAR"...only purpose is that of a remote-sensing measurement sensor. However and more specifically to your point, there is much behavioral information, in my opinion, that amply illustrates that certain ET objects are both cognizant of Earthian originated EM spectra and-or utilize specific applications of EM spectra to accomplish various ET object tasks. Later, when time permits I'll cite a few examples, if y'all are interested?

>Any ET will need some energy/food/sustenance of some form.
>They will be as bound by the same physical laws as us.
>Some limited form of communication should be possible.

These are all good points....and I've thought about these same issues many times over the years in consideration of the interspeciel cognitive gap.

We (Humans) have lived with ants for at least 50,000 years, --how well have Humans learned to chat with these specie, beyond strategies that employs poison? I realize that this may seem to be an extreme example, but is it? Ants are self-aware, they are intelligent, they are telepathic, they communicate with their own members and with other clutches, they co-exist in self-supported organized societies, they are adaptive, they consume and acquire energy, et cetera. Some species are just so different and while there are a few mutual commonalities that exist, there really isn't enough common energy exchange to support dialogic interaction. Ants consciousness model is too different.

Linguistics scientists the world over are working to establish communicative strategies with numerous terrestrial species with varying degrees of success. Aside from perhaps Dolphins, which may qualify for this type discussion, simply that they are wild animals. The dolphins that have been bred in captivity several generations do communicate better than wild specie members.

>Orbs are possibly not entirely grounded in our physical universe

That certainly does seem to be a characteristic.

'Orb' subjects are my principle ET study focus, and I've been studying these objects since ~1992.

There are three distinct behavioral classes of 'orbs'. Most folks interchange these different classes in dialogue without notice while treating the different classes as though are related to only one type. Yes it is true, all 'orbs' are geometrically spherical.

It is my opinion that Disc-Orbs are physical objects, while both Photo-Orbs and Luminous-Orbs are apparently quasi-physical, and the later are known to exhibit characteristics consistent with psionic physics.

>which must make them much harder to communicate with

Yep.

>Did you ever get any coherent message or sense of meaning from them?

<sigh> That's a subject for another post. I'm working several projects right now, and I've expended too much time on these type posts.

Your reply was interesting and it touched upon various subjects dear to me.

Thanks,

ka-lemtah

[Longeyes]

Hi Ka-lemtah

No worries was genuinely interesting post.

There have been far more Radar contacts than that, although of course even seeing a genuine ET craft/ UFO is very unlikely.
The head of UK air traffic control said last year that it was probably one a month (i think he said worldwide)
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/08/20/ufo-visits-britain-head-of-uk-air-traffic-control_n_1809535.html
Disclosure project witnesses UFOs on radar
http://www.disclosureproject.org/access/es-wit-test-radar-pilot.htm
Rendlesham forest showed up on two different sets of radar see thread I put the references in there
http://www.theoutpostforum.com/tof/showthread.php?57-Rendlesham-Forest-incident-Britian-s-Roswell
There are far more of you look, Dick French mentions two separate occasions from memory.
Many ET craft try to avoid radar all together. That was after 'they' discovered it was possible by phasing radar signals to bring ET craft down.

I meant E-M communications not just radar communications. I thought perhaps radio would be have been tried without much sucess and Dr Wong may have heard of that.

Ants of course are not intelligent, perhaps an alien species with at least our capability would have something to discuss - How each others technology worked for instance?
We can of course teach dogs quite a few words and chimps even more.

Would love to know more about your orb research sounds fascinating.
Have you anything published or could you expand on it in a new thread?

[Longeyes]

And don't forget all the best cases never made it into Bluebook. That comes for a few different sources. It was never designed to let the people know the truth just to bury the whole issue once and for all.