I don't care how you get there.
I don't care what you do to get there.
The goal is to win.
What time is it?
Game time!
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Welcome to the show.
This is GigaOM Biological, a high-resistance, low-noise information brief brought to you by a biologist.
Very happy to be here this morning and give you that warning that you need to hear every day.
Make sure you're making your way off of social media.
This is the only noncompliance that actually matters, because there is only one chance in history to collect this data.
And that data, unfortunately, also includes, as my friend Rosemary pointed out,
It also includes the search for biting foxes.
And I might mention more of that later today.
Otherwise, just let that be a hint of things to come.
There's lots of people who are really starting to see the big trap that we are all in.
Ladies and gentlemen, autism spectrum disorder is a myth used to make sure that intramuscular injection is never questioned as a methodology, that virology is never questioned as a science, that public health is never questioned as either.
a reason or an answer.
And that's the same reason why pandemics and gain of function are so in vogue right now.
Because they are part of the same mythology that is slowly inverting our sovereignty into the experimental animal status.
You are becoming a mouse!
And if you don't understand why and what's happening, why the cheese is free, you will be dead in this trap.
If you want to send something, you can send it to PO Box 802, Bethel Park, Pennsylvania.
We are running the same rat race that you are.
We have a family of five, and that's the only magic trick we are pulling off here at Giga Home Biological.
If you want to support that and the support of this stream, please go there and find a way.
That's gigaohmbiological.com.
You should be watching at stream.gigaohm.bio just to tell me how well the stream works there.
Because if we are kicked off of all of the other mainstream social media, in theory, stream.gigaohm.bio would still be live.
If you want to have a statement read on air or played on air, you can record a voicemail at 412-423-6343.
And you can even call it, and there's a chance that I'll answer it because it does, technically speaking, ring on my phone.
It's May 28th, 2025, and you are hearing at Gigaohm Biological the biology that they ignore.
Hopefully the truth is going to set us free eventually.
I don't know when that's actually going to happen, though.
I don't know if that's going to happen.
I know that if we don't try, we ain't getting out.
I know if we don't flap our wings, we ain't going to fly.
And so I'm going to see what we can do every day.
Ladies and gentlemen, the voice that you hear, if I didn't say it already, is Jonathan J. Cooey.
I come to you live out of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in the back of my garage.
I have worked for the current Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and helped him write that Wuhan cover-up book as a scientific consultant.
So I know a lot of his staff.
I also worked for Children's Health Defense as a staff scientist under the direction of Mr. Brian Hooker.
A lot of my research and ideas are represented poorly by Jessica Hockett, a traitor to America's grandchildren.
in a substack that she uses AI to write called Woodhouse 76.
This little scam is promoted worldwide by Jonathan Engler and Claire Craig and Pierre Corey and Nick Hudson, all associated with the meddler groups Heart and Panda.
Lots of good people are wasting their time working under the direction of Claire Craig.
and Jonathan Engler, two very awful people.
And also part of this group, Panda Centered in South Africa, who had me present three times in 2022, but lost all those videos.
All their videos from Jessica Rose are still up on Rumble, but not mine.
And I've shared some barbecue time with the current
Director of the NIH Jayanta Bhattacharya, a fella from India.
Great guy from Stanford, good friend of mine.
Hasn't called me since his schedule filled up, but that's okay.
I guess that's the way it works when you get a government job.
You find out who, you let everybody know who your friends are.
Welcome to the show, ladies and gentlemen.
it's a it's a dark world that you see on the internet it's a dark dark world um i don't know what to say other than rna cannot pandemic intramuscular injections in general are not medicine um and uh quite dumb and transfection transformation that would have been a crime in healthy humans if we were honest about it but
they weren't honest about it.
And finally, and there's lots better explanations for what happened with regard to the number of people dead and stuff like that.
And one of the things they don't tell you is that about two and a half million people to three million people die in America every year.
And so, you know,
a million people to COVID with a bunch of misattribution isn't very hard.
Definitely if you use a little Murder and Lies to sculpt that show.
That's where we are ladies and gentlemen.
This is the way forward is thinking about a new model for biology so that this bad biology doesn't enslave our children.
If you don't believe the
The biological myth is all based on a signal they saw coming for 20 years or so.
You can find the McKinsey Global Institute Dependency and Depopulation Report from January 2025 that will show you clearly this anticipated rise in all-cause mortality and then population collapse was anticipated and orchestrated.
It could have been seen 20 years ago and predicted 20 years ago That's why all I have to do is flip to this screen and show you this population pyramid of America starting in 1990 when I was graduating from high school and this this generation just above me there
seems to be a big bump in the population pyramid that will represent a temporary overload on the on the healthcare systems of all the Western nations because those families after World War II had a lot of kids but they discouraged that afterward and so it kind of went away and so you can see these bumps these bumps are anticipated rises in all-cause mortality that could be used
to create the illusion of infectious disease, especially if you sculpted it using murder and sophisticated lies.
And I actually think that's how they did this pandemic thing.
And I think they had bigger ideas.
I think they had bigger investments they were protecting.
And those investments, wow, I'm not even on the screen.
Those investments include the Human Genome Project, which was actually a multinational project from the very beginning.
And that explains, I think, a lot of the resumes of the team of performers with elaborate costumes and scripts that were put on the internet and have been bamboozling you and I and our families for the last five years.
And so I think we're at a crucial moment if we realize that social media has been weaponized against us.
That trap already closed.
And if you think that you're using social media successfully to make a difference, you are definitely running around in the trap and have no idea that you are doing it.
So get off your go-kart, get out of the hamster wheel, point your flashlight forward, keep your arms straight, and let's climb out of this cave together.
This is all they ever had, right?
All they ever had was actors on social media and memes that nobody sees.
And they can create the illusion that, wow, everybody thinks that Jonathan Cooley's a wacko.
And it seems to be that everybody in this chat thinks that Jonathan Cooley's a wacko.
And those are the kinds of weapons that they've used against every single one of the people in this narrative.
You, me, and also the people who go on Joe Rogan.
They're all victims of the trap, because the trap is social media.
Because there, they can see what you see, they know what you see, and they can make
You believe that what you're seeing is an accurate representation of something called reality when it's not.
The only people that have ever seen that clown are the people that need to.
The only people that know that Steve Kirsch exists are the people that need to.
The only people that know that Dr. Jordan Vaughn exists are the people that need to.
That's why your family and friends, if they're anti-Trump or Democrats who really don't like him or like where we are as a country because of that narrative, then they've never heard of any of these people.
Because these people are part of our hamster wheel, our own personal conservative, curious, that side of the Scooby-Doo mystery is still trapped over here thinking that this is the dialogue and this is the, you know, the word is getting out about the vaccine schedule and that is just absolutely positively not true.
and we are participating with this guy and have tricked ourselves into believing that we are helping to stop the train when we are not.
The train is going to go on and on and on and the people that are pretending to stop the train, that have recruited you to help stop the train, those people are part of the same train company.
And why do they do it?
Because they want you to think you're needed.
They want you to think that you're important, but you're not.
You're part of the show.
And the more people that go along, the more enticing it becomes.
And now you see what social media is able to do because they don't even need to have a real train.
They just need to have images and videos on your phone, which they've already admitted.
A lot of them can be faked if they want to.
And so it's a quite miraculous time we're in because it's visible.
You can actually see the cracks in the illusion, the bricks in the wall.
You can hear the bricks in the wall because the internet still contains the record of them.
And so when Brian says that he doesn't like the word autism in 2013, it means quite a bit in light of his 20 year track record.
his 30-year career as a dude.
You don't have to evaluate him as the guy who interviewed William Thompson.
You have to evaluate him as Brian Hooker the American.
What has Brian Hooker the American done over the course of his life and career for America?
That's what you have to think about.
What kind of choices did Mark Kulak make for America?
What kind of choices did Jonathan Cooey make for America?
Why did Jonathan Cooey leave the United States in 2002 kind of angry?
And why did Jonathan Cooey have published posters for the Society for Neuroscience meeting where on the bottom there was a little square that was big enough to read from about eight feet away that said, the US government is out of our control.
And every time I came over from the Netherlands and presented a poster, I had a poster that said that on the bottom of it.
Why do you think that this whole thing is happening?
Why do we never hear about Brandy Vaughn?
Why does nobody hear about Jonathan Cooley or Mark Kulak?
Because there is an illusion of consensus that is created by what is effectively military programming suites that we have adopted as social media.
And that term in and of itself is part of the enchantment.
If they told you that these are militarized social control and monitoring programs, you would have said, well, I don't want any of these on my phone.
But because that's not what they say, because this is for all the marbles, this is for the grandchildren of earth, this is to make sure that all of the grandchildren of earth are enslaved.
Because in a hundred years, everyone living on this planet is gonna be dead.
We're talking about the grandchildren of earth.
The ones that aren't here yet.
That's how these people are planning and thinking.
And the rest of us are experimental animals from whom the most data possible should be extracted for the betterment of the species.
That's why there's a fake anti-vax movement.
That's why people like Mary Talley Bowden need to be keep focused on the ivermectin and the free speech and the encroachment on your professional freedoms.
And what are your professional rights and how did Texas violate them?
Because if she ever thought about the bigger picture,
about the biology of the murder in 2020, the biology of what happened in only a few hospitals, and the reality of the anticipated rise in all-cause mortality and how it might be used by a number of interested parties in order to create the illusion of something.
That's the reason why we have somebody like Jack Cruz out there also pushing the same kind of nonsense
The same kind of stories where there are a bunch of super bad guys with a bunch of super technologies that they're just already unleashing or they're about to unleash.
And then there's also aliens too.
And they can open up wormholes and disappear whole planes full of AIDS experts.
It's all scripted bullshit, ladies and gentlemen, because social media is not reality.
Social media is the military weapon.
Social media is the media, is the military weapon.
That's why when Robert Malone went on stage in January of 2023 with Meryl Nass,
Sasha Latupova, Asim Malhotra and Mike Palmer.
He said that we would never figure it out because it is the world.
It is the social media and all of these places where supposedly the truth was coming out, where supposedly Malone got censored on LinkedIn so he moved to Gab or to
or to locals, or to X. And then supposedly people were getting censored on X until Elon Musk saved the day.
Some guy from South Africa, where... Never mind.
It's all scripted bullshit, ladies and gentlemen.
Once you see that this team of performers and how they call for each other, how they all agree that this is all happening on X. My X account is where I just put my thoughts, you know, I don't even censor anything there.
and everybody from from Fox News hosts all the way to Jack Krause agrees that X is the only place where it's safe to say anything and now just now it's starting to malfunction or glitch or something and so it's now really important that Elon Musk fixes X or otherwise free speech will be lost forever and it's just this endless show trying to make
people think that and believe that and accept the premise that social media is the only alternative we have.
And that is absolutely positively not true.
That's the part that I think is most important to understand.
I mean, you can see clearly it's murder.
by their own numbers, you can see clearly that it's murder.
So the question becomes, how did we get to having Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
as the 2025 Health and Human Services Secretary, the only position in government that can officially declare the emergency that we're under still?
How did we get here?
Well, I've got an interesting theory.
that I don't think is that crazy that has to do something with this book from Skyhorse Publishing.
The editor, guy in chief or whatever of Skyhorse Publishing, Tony Lyons, has this book with Jesse Ventura.
And in the epilogue of the book,
There's this story about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
running as an independent candidate for president, but then joining one of the two main party candidates in this story would be Jesse, the body Ventura as his vice president.
And then the president being shot, the candidate being shot.
And so there's some eerie parallels there with this book in 2008 with where we are now.
Some eerie parallels with what I think Steve Bannon would have predicted in 2020, or at least surely would have stated out loud, that he thinks that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
should be a vice presidential candidate.
a presidential, vice presidential candidate, which is exactly what is said in this book by Tony Lyons, who Steve Bannon has often called the brilliant Tony Lyons.
And so also, of course, it's important to understand that Robert Malone has a long, long, long history with this biological mentor chain that goes all the way back to Bob Gallo and Murray Gardner and Rischetti of Judy Mikovits and all these people that at one point in time were telling us a story
that there would be a geneticist in every hospital curing genetic diseases with retroviruses.
They actually thought that and said that back then.
It was just a matter of time before they would be standard, you know, sort of therapeutic tools.
And that was admitted by Robert Malone in one of his interviews with a Dutch outlet in 2022.
And then, of course, the research and development director of the Human Genome Project, the guy who was responsible for a lot of the robotics advances that allowed this otherwise almost seemingly insurmountable task of doing restriction enzyme mapping of the Human Genome Project to get a landmark
landmarking, you know, like the first sort of guideposts on a sort of map of the human genome that would very quickly be sold as a completed genome, a read genome.
Now we can just do it.
And remarkably, we have this guy, Brett Weinstein, who from the very beginning, I've been very straightforward that and skeptical and almost hoping
with my regular mentioning of her and with my leaving Piper Stover on my website under the review on the Scooby link, which she of course asked me to take her name off of that a while ago, but I did not.
I've been waiting for any of these people who, you know, I guess maybe Kevin McCairn or somebody like Charles Rixey to figure out that Piper Stover must not be
all that she says she is, and make sure that everybody realizes that I would have never been connected to Bret Weinstein except for this woman, Piper Stover.
leave it to Mark Kulak to do one of the best shows he's ever done today, tying together so many of these threads with Piper Stover, making another sort of how is it possible that when you take it from a certain angle, all of these data points line up so perfectly.
And more important to me than anything else was that this kind of all was spurred because I texted him the other day and marveled at the idea that, you know,
After all this time, no one has ever come to me and told me something about Piper Stover.
It seems to me that if anybody wanted to burn me or figure out what was going on or try to, I don't know, get something on the background of this, Piper Stover would not be ignored.
That's why I have her here on this slide for so long.
And Mark's show today is just
was just spectacular.
I mean it's just spectacular and so I will watch or listen to that podcast that he plays in that video but I want to give it time for everybody to see the production that he did.
I think it's really spot on and it's not surprising to me.
I don't want to be
I left that person behind when I realized that I couldn't trust her.
And I felt as though the decision to not worry about it, to not try to figure it out, because inevitably I'm not going to be able to figure out who she is or what she does or what her role is.
I just left it behind.
I was too frustrated.
I was too focused on trying to get Bret Weinstein to listen to me.
It's too focused on trying to get somebody to listen to me.
Matt Crawford.
Oh my gosh, dude.
I was all stuck in this stuff.
And so Piper Stover, I just kind of left behind.
And it's remarkable because she was this woman who encouraged me to write this review and made me write it for like five months.
It was done in January of 2021.
And it wasn't until May that, you know, she kind of agreed it was okay.
Like, and it was going to go in the wall street journal or something like that.
I mean, it's,
It's remarkable how taken.
You know, she was texting my wife.
At one point she was trying to recruit my wife to tutor her daughter.
I mean, this web of lies is nasty.
And so this scripted bullshit team, what is it for?
What are the murder and lies for?
It is really huge.
It's big.
It's the biggest thing there is.
It's the Human Genome Project.
There can be no doubt about it.
It is the focus of more human resources.
It is the largest, longest, most funded human endeavor, way bigger than any kind of Manhattan project.
And so we are essentially at a crux where the shift is now being made.
And unfortunately, I don't have a selfie with Piper, even though she did come to my house and stayed over here for a couple of days.
remarkable things remarkable five years of history of trying to figure out assuming that there are only good guys assuming that there are only good actors there are just people who don't get it or people who haven't figured it out yet or are missing certain clues but that is not the case
There are fooled individuals, unwitting participants, and then there are fully scripted actors that are working against you out there.
And they are enabled by social media.
They are privileged users of social media, most likely, with a whole army of anonymous accounts that can support them in any way and shape and fashion.
And so it's a long, strange trip to get to the point where you realize that ultimately this is just about a lie.
It's about this idea of molecular evolution.
The molecular phylogeny of life is a lie.
And Bad Biology 101 is a lie.
is what has sprouted from it all of this public health nonsense has sprouted from it all of this you know faux nutrition stuff has sprouted from this and it will continue to to spiral out of control until we go back to the fundamentals
And that means learning a different model of biology.
As Buckminster Fuller said, you got to offer a better model.
You can't just say the old model is bad.
And so that's what we're doing here at GigaOM Biological every day that we can and working on a high school curriculum to do that.
Evolution because DNA is really the best summary of that idea.
Let's listen to this.
That's how it ends up because the bankers can always take their money and begin digging holes in another country and emptying out that country.
Now remember what we talked about yesterday and what we watched yesterday was a movie called Slavery in the Name of Progress or it was something else and somebody looked it up but that was what it's under at YouTube.
And it is supposedly a Martin Scorsese film which is warning us about climate change or finite resources or environmental destruction.
I'm not really sure what it's warning us about.
Other than I think something to do with the banks and driving capitalism or driving consumption.
And so the banks, he says, you know, they'll just dig holes in one place until they need to dig hole another place.
Civilization is kind of a, as a, as a forest fire.
And in a lot of ways, you know, you and I, we probably would agree and not argue with this.
But at the heart of it is a responsibility to the species.
At the heart of it is the idea that civilization as it exists is gonna result in our extinction.
And that's an interesting proposition.
And that's where that movie left off.
I wanna pick up right there with the last 20 minutes of this because I think you'll be quite shocked at what was left.
That's the global financial system.
If the background music was annoying, that's okay.
It wasn't something I was going to do all the time.
It was on.
I left it running.
I don't know how loud it was.
Sorry about that.
I think she's sad about the forest.
I think that if we don't take care of the Amazon, if we don't take care of it, we'll end up turning it into a desert.
Because when we cut down a tree and it runs out of water, we'll have a lot of things and in the end it'll end up in a desert.
The economists say, if you clear-cut the forest, take the money and put it in the bank, you can make six or seven percent.
If you clear-cut the forest, put it into Malaysia or Papua New Guinea, you can make 30 or 40 percent.
So who cares whether you keep the forest?
Cut it down, put the money somewhere else.
When those forests are gone, put it in fish.
When the fish are gone, put it in computers.
Money doesn't stand for anything, and money now grows faster than the real world.
Now that's a very interesting statement, that money grows faster than the real world.
But if it's fiat currency and they can print as much as they want to, then it never grew like the natural world.
I don't want to get too much into that because I'm not an economist, but economy, the idea of economics is nonsense.
Economics is not a science.
even if it's at the University of Chicago, it's not a science.
Economics is hocus pocus with big words and probabilities and models, and it's the worst of the worst.
Conventional economics is a form of brain damage.
Oh, here you go.
Oh, wow, okay, now he's gonna tell you that.
Economics is so fundamentally disconnected from the real world, it is destructive.
If you take an introductory course in economics,
He is a geneticist, though, you notice that, right?
So there's still a red thread running through this, which is extraordinarily yucky.
The professor in the first lecture will show a slide of the economy.
And it looks very impressive, you know, raw materials, extraction, process, manufacture, wholesale, retail, with arrows going back and forth.
And they try to impress you because they think
They know it damn well.
Economics is not a science, but they're trying to fool us into thinking that it's a real science.
It's not.
Economics is a set of values that they then try to use mathematical equations and all that stuff and pretend that it's a science.
But if you ask the economist, in that equation, where do you put the ozone layer?
Where do you put the deep underground aquifers of fossil water?
Where do you put topsoil or biodiversity?
Their answer is, oh, those are externalities.
Well, then you might as well be on Mars.
That economy's not based in anything like the real world.
It's life, the web of life that filters water in the hydrologic cycle.
It's microorganisms in the soil that create the soil that we can grow our food in.
Nature performs all kinds of services.
Insects fertilize all of the flowering plants.
These services are vital to the health of the planet.
Economists call these externalities.
That's nuts!
Unlimited economic progress in a world of finite natural resources doesn't make sense.
It's a pattern that is bound to collapse.
I gotta move this over and I'm gonna slide this over too.
Sorry about that.
Get this up.
There we go.
This should work.
And we keep seeing it collapsing, but then we build it up because there are these strong vested interests we must have business with.
Oh, darn it.
And she's a meddler, of course.
We know that, right?
I saw her on an airplane.
I have a selfie.
Business as usual.
And, you know, you get the arms manufacturers, you get the petroleum industry, you get the pharmaceutical industry, and all of this feeding into helping to create corrupt governments who are putting the future of their own people at risk.
You can imagine lilies growing in a pond.
Lilies grow very rapidly.
They double every day.
I did not tell her directly.
What I said was, could we take a picture together?
You used to be a big hero of mine.
And I swear, she processed it and she then pulled down her mask and we took the picture.
But I definitely used the words, you used to be a big hero of mine.
So yeah, I kind of did.
They're going to cover the whole surface, and there won't be any way of the fish getting oxygen, and all the life is going to die in the pond.
That's how rapidly things can grow.
One day, you're half full of lilies.
The next day, you're dead.
You could say that today, we're in the point at which the lily pond is half full.
The life is being snuffed out of national economies, and the debt goes on doubling.
How long can it do it?
See, I think it's difficult to express how disingenuous it is.
And I still have to kind of think through it because it's just striking me now is so important.
But just to change your perspective a little bit.
This constant switching between talking about economics and talking about biology and using biology as an analogy for economics is a really, really dangerous kind of rhetoric, because it seems to abdicate the responsibility of these greedy
no good slime balls all over the world who are interested in enslaving our grandchildren.
It seems to abdicate them from any responsibility.
It's just how money works, man.
You know, if you just have money, that's how money works.
And that's how bankers work or something like that.
And it's
And then to use the biological analogies seems to suggest that it's an inevitable thing that's part of the world.
It has one day to go.
all the civilizations of the past, and I think- See, the problem I have with that there, for example, is where's the camera in that picture?
I don't wanna sound like a conspiracy theorist, but where's the camera in that picture so far away from that?
I mean, it's, they're preparing us for decline, exactly.
Our own only seem to be doing well when they're expanding, when the population is growing, when the industrial output is growing, and when the cities are spreading outwards.
Eventually you reach the point at which the population has overrun everything.
The cities have expanded over the farmland.
The people at the bottom begin to starve and the people at the top lose their legitimacy.
Now, what I think is happening now that Mark and I are thinking differently and seeing it differently, I think it is possible that this is also an opportunity to seize on a moment to lay a mythology about overpopulation.
Because if in reality, in 50 years, half those buildings are going to be empty anyway,
if in reality there are going to be whole cities that are effectively going to have a lot of extra housing all over the world.
then this is their one opportunity to tell you that, oh, there's finite resources on earth and we're about to run out of them.
And that's why there's so much problem when there's probably not going to be any problem.
And that may be the whole reason why they went all in on this consumer economy for as long as they've had and just polluted everything because they kind of already know.
that this whole finite resources thing doesn't really matter if the population is about to go from 10 billion to 2 billion, and then all of these supply chains are going to fall apart and all this consumption is going to fall off a cliff, then in reality, you know, saying that, you know, look at this, the cities are like the earth is about to be overrun is an absolute lie.
It's about to be, it's about to be empty with the exception of India.
And so you get hunger, you get revolution.
Why is that explosion inside of a castle?
That's so bizarre.
Now, one kind of scary thing about the moment we're in is that for the first time, there's kind of only one system.
So if the whole thing goes down, you won't have what you've had in previous eras of epic collapse, which is that even though one civilization goes down, it may take a while to recover, there are other robust civilizations that are kind of the guardians of progress.
So this dude with a nice new haircut and stuff in this video is very interesting to me and a little triggering because he had a whole series of fake arguments with Brett Weinstein during the pandemic, which promoted both of them on issues that don't matter.
And he made a real big deal about calling Brett Weinstein out.
And now he's in this, it's just, it's all one malevolent show.
In that sense, some of the things that have been reassuring in the past,
about progress don't necessarily apply to the current situation because once you once you get to the global level you've only got one experiment working that's just the inevitable culmination of its growth ever since the stone age and there were way stations along the way like the roman empire
And now here we are, and more and more people are in the same boat, and they face problems, and either they will solve them together or suffer together, and possibly on a catastrophic scale.
Here we go.
Escaping the Trap.
We are entering an increasingly dangerous period of our history.
Our genetic code still carries the selfish and aggressive instincts that were of survival advantage in the past.
But I'm an optimist.
I can't control the music volume.
If we are the only intelligent beings in the galaxy, we should make sure we survive and continue.
Not to be a dick, but this is the easiest voice in the world to fake, right?
I mean, come on now.
If we can avoid disaster for the next two centuries, our species should be safe.
We have made remarkable progress in the last hundred years.
Our only chance of long-term survival is not to remain inward looking on planet Earth, but to spread out into space.
Our only hope of long-term survival is to spread out into space.
That is some seriously incredible shit.
The first AI voice, the first computer voice that was for a human, yes, and it will be used against us forever.
I was at a conference a few years back with George Lucas, and he came up and said, you know, there's only two hopes for humanity.
Either we find another planet to colonize after we've destroyed this one,
or perhaps your technology, meaning what we're doing with the genetic code, might be able to allow us to transform ourselves or other aspects of the planet where we could continue to live here.
We are here to celebrate the completion of the first survey of the entire human genome.
The first survey of the entire human genome.
Here's Craig Venter, the guy that Piper Stover mentioned in the discussion that she was having about how nanobiotechnology and AI was going to revolutionize and create artificial life back in December of 2019.
And so when she contacted me at the end of 2020 saying that she was some kind of, you know, Patriot, used to work in China, China's bad, they're bad guys.
Don't you think this is a lab leak?
I thought, I guess maybe she's okay.
She says she works with, she worked with Dan Sirotkin, but Dan Sirotkin was a creep, so they couldn't talk.
And he suggested that she call me.
or he suggested that she call me.
Yes.
So that's how we got connected through Harvard to the big house.
You know, Carl Surotkin, the guy who worked at Los Alamos laboratory, you know, Piper Stover, the, the lady who's co-founder of her company worked at Los Alamos laboratory, you know, Los Alamos laboratory where they do all the sequencing and where they come up with all the algorithms for the sequencing.
Yeah.
that place that's also the Department of Energy or something else.
I mean, whatever, right?
Who cares?
It's just me and Mark.
I mean, nobody else is even, I mean, nobody else is even in the ballpark.
They're not even playing the same sport as us anymore.
Are you kidding me?
Look carefully how easy it is.
This is a documentary that was put on YouTube about a week and a half ago.
Without a doubt, this is the most important, most wondrous map ever produced by humankind.
We are announcing today for the first time our species can read the chemical letters of its genetic code.
For the last several years, my team has been actually sailing around the world, collecting all the species in the ocean, the micro species on filters, and we isolate all the DNA all at once from all of them.
I have a novel way of looking at these genes.
I view them as the design components of the future.
What better excuse for yachting?
It's a mind-boggling concept, even though we're doing it every day, that we can simply start with four bottles of chemicals, write the genetic code, and change the genetic code of species, basically developing new species.
and we can try and find ways to make fuels that other people haven't even imagined we can do this with.
Fuels that other people haven't imagined.
It's interesting because one of the people that was in the signal chat with Chris Martinson and Brett Weinstein and Heather Haying that I only got into because of Piper Stover was a person by the name of Jumi Kim who actually worked on biofuels in algae.
It's crazy, I mean, probably just a coinkydink, but it sure sounds a lot like genetic technologies that are involved in, I don't know, hijacking genes they find in nature and making new combinations of them for purposes unknown.
Novel sources of food were limited only by our imagination and whatever biological reality is.
When we consider trying to replace oil,
We use billions of gallons of oil a year.
I can't even, I think I have a pretty good imagination and vision what a billion gallons of oil is.
And making a billion gallons of oil from invisible microbes is a certain leap of faith.
But in fact, that's how we proceed in science.
Will that solve the greenhouse effect or I don't know, my goodness sakes.
Touching piano music.
We can now write software for life.
It's a done deal, babe.
We can just write it.
Don't these pictures convince you?
By changing and taking over evolution, changing the time course of evolution, and going into deliberate design of species for our own survival,
at least gives us some points of optimism that we have a chance to control our destiny.
Interesting.
Would it be that you would want to have a slave class and a smart class?
Would you want to have different tiers of human intelligence?
What kind of ideas do you have in store for us a few generations from now?
What kind of bullshit, nonsense, imaginary futures do they have in store for us?
This is not some super genius.
None of these people are super geniuses.
They just have really bad ideas.
It's just kind of like some of those people dancing around with the blue and white flag, celebrating the burning of some village or another village.
It's just like the people carrying around a blue and yellow flag, chanting something and it's all the same.
They're all just people with bad ideas.
This is a guy who thinks he's got a really good idea, but it's not a really good idea because it's based in a very bad idea, which is evolution because DNA, because DNA, we know everything.
We can read our genome now.
And they're lying about it.
It's all lies.
The only thing they've done is made it cheaper to sequence small pieces of DNA.
The only thing they've been able to do is hijack the ability or the tendency of bacteria to copy whatever piece of DNA is inside of them.
But insofar as those molecular truths translate to us understanding ourselves as an irreducible complexity that at its base is this symbiotic relationship with said bacteria, that's not the same at all.
And they want you to believe that it's all just one ladder of development that went from bacteria to humans and bacteria are just our contemporaries and they didn't change.
This is all part of the lie, ladies and gentlemen.
And this guy very much must be in on it.
We're here today to announce the first synthetic cell.
This is the first self-replicating species that we've had on the planet whose parent is a computer.
And I think just like the announcement of a human genome being read, or we can, or we've done it, that's not a true statement at all.
And I will admit that I haven't evaluated what it is that they did when they claimed that, but I'd bet dollars to donuts that what I would find is something absolutely atrocious with regard to self-replicating.
You didn't create anything.
One of the challenges that it faces, the human species... Remember, that's the same guy who said that some parts of our brain are from bacteria, other parts of our brain are from worms, and some of them are part... And so he thinks our brain is the consequence of step-by-step evolution from bacteria to now.
Which is also quite a remarkable statement to make.
But he did make it.
So this is the guy who's now on this shot with whatever he's about to say.
So take it with a pretty big chunk of salt.
We are more and more in a position of acting like gods.
This has been true for a while because we've had the ability to change the climate, for example.
This is going to be even more true with genetic technologies.
We're going to be able to manipulate other species and eventually ourselves.
We're going to be in a position of controlling our own fate in a way that no... X-Men.
He's going to transform into a solar-paneled shuttle.
...creature has ever, in a billion years on the planet, had an opportunity to do.
I once wrote a poem in which a mad bishop said, and man became God, became greater than God in the Godhood of man.
I do not see anyone living in this materialistic society as being anything like God.
I don't know what God is, but, uh,
In my wildest dreams, I would never conceive of God or a God.
Look at how they use this woman.
Some kind of voice of reason, some old grandma lady to tell you that I, I don't think of us as gods, but she still seems to be pretty, pretty behind the idea that we need to engineer the species or something.
Certainly it'd be a lot better if there were only 500,000 humans instead of 10 billion.
I don't know how much worse it can get, but this is pretty bad.
This movie, and it's sort of the enchantment that it puts out there, and the potential for it to suck in young people is really incredible.
It's a nasty one.
It's being like a modern human being in a materialistic society.
We're anything but godlike.
I think the challenges are so
overwhelming to all of us that we're all trying to just use whatever new tools we can to try and change the future.
Synthetic biology is a progress trap par excellence.
Biologists have pointed out that these engineering approaches is all very well, and the engineers can try to treat life as though it was some sort of computer or engineering substrate.
But ultimately, the microbes are going to end up laughing at them, that life doesn't work like that.
I think the problems that we're seeing now, whether we're talking about hunger and massive inequity, whether we're talking about climate change or the loss of biodiversity, have been driven over the last 200 years by a system of overproduction of stuff and overconsumption of stuff.
See, so I think part of the trap
that these kinds of people are in is that they see consumerism and the people that choose to do it as particularly bad and the third world people as not having any of it and they have to live in a world where all these other people are having parties all the time and I don't think that's as good of an argument as a lot of these people think it is because essentially
It is the responsibility of the people who have orchestrated that.
It is not the responsibility of the passive people on the cruise ship.
Yes, you can choose not to take part in the cruise ship, but if you're born on a cruise ship, is it your fault?
And yet that's what these people are born on a cruise ship, but now they want everybody on the cruise ship to be ashamed of themselves and choose to jump overboard into the ocean.
And it doesn't really, that doesn't really make sense.
What would make sense is
I don't know what would make sense, but this doesn't make sense to me.
These people are holding really, really thick contradictions in their head and also missing key pieces of data, including the predictions of world population that the population pyramids of the world make.
And that is that we're not gonna have this, we're not on an exponential curve that's gonna go off into infinity.
It's not 10 billion now and 20 billion soon.
And it's either they are absolutely aware of it and are going along with this as part of a malevolent narrative control mythology thing, or they're too naive to understand it.
They've been told too many times they're very smart or that they've come to believe this mythology because they haven't been able to get on a long enough time horizon to see it.
And then that's been inflated and inflated and inflated to the point where it really is not in any way reasonable.
The companies and those within governments who have supported that approach are now saying that they will provide new technologies to continue that consumption of stuff, that level of production.
It's just not realistic.
ExxonMobil and Synthetic Genomics have built a new facility to identify the most productive strains of algae.
Algae are amazing little critters.
That's exactly what Jumi Kim worked on, you see?
They secrete oil, which we could turn into biofuels.
They also absorb CO2.
We're hoping to supplement the fuels that we use in our vehicles to someday help meet the world's energy demands.
Which is harder, mapping the entire genome set that makes up a human being or making algae produce energy?
Making algae produce energy is not hard, but doing it on the scale required to have a major economic and environmental impact is going to be a huge challenge.
We have good partner with that with ExxonMobil to try and get it to the scale that it needs to be of billions of gallons a year.
A lot of engineering is required for facilities the size of San Francisco.
I think they're serious and we're serious.
What we're seeing alongside the development of synthetic biology is a massive corporate grab on plant life.
Literally speaking, that means a grab on land, and a grab on seas as well, where people are being moved off of land to make way for the growing of plant life that can be transformed into plastics, chemicals, fuels, and so forth.
What drives synthetic biology is not an attempt to save the planet or help humanity, but an attempt to increase the bottom line for certain very large corporations.
If we're going to feed the upcoming nine billion people,
We can't afford to use our prime cropland.
And so the idea, the biological myth that they're laying down is that we're on an exponential curve and it's 9 billion, then it's going to be 10, then it's going to be 20.
They're not going to tell you that 9 billion might be the top.
And so 100 years from now, we're gonna need a lot less food.
So we better prepare for it.
We better move things around and get things ready, or identify the countries that are gonna need help.
It's nothing like that.
This is all about economic opportunity, but more importantly, it's about governance of our, it's about enslavement of our grandchildren under this mythology.
We need to pass this,
mythology onto our grandchildren by telling them that this is what's happening and what happened.
And it's a lie.
for trying to produce the billions of gallons of fuel that we use.
What we're doing with writing the genetic code, changing these species, allows us to use desert land.
We just need sunlight and CO2 for using these new engineered algae, for example.
No water.
They don't need any water.
Synthetic biology, in a way, you know, it's frightening, but I'm very sympathetic to this in many ways.
It would be nice to get a more water-efficient plant, but still, it would still need water.
Craig Venter cannot create a plant which needs no water and no nitrogen, or which totally fixes all its nitrogen by sucking it from the air.
It cannot go that far.
This doesn't fundamentally change the game.
What fundamentally changes the game, what people don't want to hear,
And I'm coming to this all the time and people say, you know, don't talk to us like that because it's just a no starter.
But for me, this is the only starter.
We have to use less.
The poor people need more.
There is no doubt about it.
There is no discussion there.
If you are an average villager somewhere in Rajasthan or Punjab or Nigeria, you need more, period.
They say basic human decency compels you to say these people need more, more clean water, more basic food, more education for their children.
The discussion closed right before it begins.
But as far as us is concerned, we certainly could and should do with much, much, much less.
People have been conditioned that things have to always get better.
And immediately, if you say limit something, people think this is not getting better.
But it would be.
It's not even a non-starter saying, people, you should eat less.
You should eat less meat, right?
Even that's a non-starter, right?
You should use less electricity, right?
You should build smaller cars.
The other day I saw the vice president of GM.
But what about all the...
It's just so dumb.
This is so dumb.
Because it puts all the onus on the small, little, tiny person.
On the little family who's supposed to feel bad about their overconsumption.
When it's people like this guy and all the other people that live in higher parts of the economic system, the economic tier that are doing all the consuming.
It's all these industries that are doing all the consuming that a lot of us don't take anything from.
Is me buying books on eBay causing a lot of problems?
I guess, I don't know.
I don't understand really what he's talking about with, I don't buy 10 iPads a year.
I'm buying old binoculars on eBay.
I'm buying old books.
I'm playing basketball and I'm streaming.
What am I doing here?
What's going on?
What do I need to change about the way that I work or the way that I consume?
And it puts the onus on the wrong people.
And this guy talks about it like it's obvious that we all got to make changes.
I guarantee you if we all started recycling and we all started turning all the lights off and we all started filling our tires up to proper pressure, and we all started, you know, commuting together, it wouldn't fix anything.
Certainly nothing about Israel or Ukraine
or President Trump's show would change.
We would still have an Indian-born guy at NIH that pretended to be my friend for a few years.
We would still have some, I don't know what, recovering addict as HHS secretary that posed as something and holy man, what is going on?
talking about the new GM, right?
And one of these journalists asked him rightly, you know, but your cars are still so heavy.
And he says, yes, we are working on it.
What is there to work on it, right?
There are so many things which we could do, you know, not to surrender our standard of living, not to kind of live in a gutter, really, right?
You know, but we don't need one and a half ton car to go from red light to red light in a city, really.
People are not willing to go back on these things.
Most of them simply are not.
Because they've been totally hijacked by this material culture.
Let's not underestimate the persuasion, the power of this material culture.
It's immense.
It's just immense.
When I've seen so many people being... It's not the material culture, it's the media.
and particularly the social media.
For us to now call that, the culture is that.
They have complete control over it.
If they wanted to change the way we thought about things, it would take them a few months.
Whole swaths of society could be convinced to make different choices and to go different directions and to believe different things, I assure you.
and this movie is just a part of that.
That's why it's on YouTube.
So genuinely unhappy that they cannot afford a $50,000 bathroom remodeling, right?
I mean, there's something wrong with that value, right?
Because bathroom is a place where you should spend like, whatever, 10 minutes to take a shower, brush your teeth, so it doesn't have to be worse.
But you know how much money people are...
Again, on my mind, because we are thinking about redoing our bathroom.
So it's on my mind.
So it's very interesting.
So for me, it's a chore, because it has to be done.
So don't you see, he doesn't even see it.
If those people didn't have the money, they wouldn't spend it on their bathroom.
If these people didn't have so much money that they could spend it on anything frivolously, and it doesn't matter, then that kind of a consumption wouldn't go on, because that's not what's happening in my house.
We're not over consuming here, buying $30 a year, dolls a year when we should only buy three, which is also funny what Trump said recently.
It's the same bullshit as this.
The reason why it's happening is because it's there by design.
They are preying on us like financial animals.
We have been a captive population and we have been farmed for everything that we can possibly be farmed for for 200 years.
And the traders have come home to roost now.
The last bones of the United States are being plucked clean.
The last value is being drained out of our treasury.
And now they want you to believe it's climate change, and scarcity of resources, and overpopulation, and we can't feed everybody, and we got to give more stuff to the poor world.
But for many people, it's kind of a life-affirming thing, you know.
People are renting storage spaces, right, which they will never access in the next 20 years, to store the junk which they cannot store in their 5,000-square-foot homes, right?
So do we need that?
So it's just amazing.
It's, it's, it's, it's, it's, this is very difficult to put the genie in the bottle.
So everything is defined in this material thing.
I could make it a lot more coherent, but you see, this is difficult because when you make it a lot more coherent, you make it prescriptive.
And prescriptions never work, really, because I don't have the solution.
I can't sit here and say, you know, we should follow this and by 2030 everything click and we all live happily ever after, right?
So I'm making it deliberately uncoherent.
I could be very doctrinaire.
But you see, I live for 26 years in a communist society.
I'm inoculated against any doctrinaire, grand solution, saying, you know, this is the pattern, this is the must, this is the paradigm which you have to follow.
I'm just totally set against it.
I'm making things deliberately kind of, you know, messy, inchoate, uncoordinated, because that's how life is.
We don't know what pattern will emerge.
As long as we are living amidst of this sea of affluence and opportunities and material riches, it's just very difficult to make this individual, voluntary, resolute step.
Nice statement he's making here, because what he's basically saying is, is that right now we don't know where civilization's gonna go.
Right now it's just a bunch of amorphous things, you know, nation states, whatever systems are there.
And we don't know what's going to happen when the population pyramid starts to impact the way that these systems interact with one another.
We're kind of in a chaotic state where maybe it's an opportunity to reorganize the way civilization works.
And so who knows what will come out on the other side.
And that's
actually exactly where you would need to be if you wanted to make nation-states a thing of the past and organize around things like, I don't know, the North American Union, the European Union, an Asian Union, and then eventually a global digital currency web or something like that.
Who knows where they're going?
The Amero's right around the corner, I'm sure of it.
Saying enough, back, limit, very difficult.
It's not.
It's really not.
And they're going to do it very quickly if that's in the cards.
And they're just telling you about it.
I think we have reached the age of limits.
Even if we are free, we are free to live according to the nature we were created in.
And it is not possible to defend models that cannot be universalized, because otherwise we would have to start from the principle that some have rights and others do not have rights.
So it is not a technical problem, it is an ethical problem.
I was walking around pointing my finger at everybody and, you know, you people and, you know, blaming the culture for its consumption.
And finally one day I came home and I had the air conditioners were on even though there was no one home.
And I was like, wait, you know, I'm going around blaming everybody else.
But the fact of the matter is that my lifestyle requires a huge amount of resource too.
So how can I blame other people?
And I realized that before I go around trying to change other people, maybe I should look at myself and change myself and keep my side of the street clean.
So it has nothing to do with the way that resources are stripped to produce all the stuff that we buy on Amazon.
It has nothing to do with that.
It has to do with us buying stuff on Amazon.
If we would stop buying stuff in stores, buying stuff in Amazon, then Amazon would go out of business.
And then all of this, you know, mining and slavery and child labor would all go away, right?
That's the whole point.
It's our responsibility
as consumers to make different choices despite the fact that there's 40 kinds of soft drink available in all of the, I mean, what are they talking about other than to invert this responsibility from them to us?
And it's our responsibility to teach our kids how that is the cardinal, that is the central bullshit here.
Yes, we are responsible adults.
We are responsible adults for what we do and how we do it.
But the vast majority of people are not causing the problem by leaving an air conditioner on or choosing not to turn their lights off or making sure that the faucet doesn't drip.
when billions of gallons of water are wasted by commercial agriculture every year, when billions of gallons of water are polluted by commercial enterprise every year, when this is just absurd, when it should be the people who are starting to regulate the corporations, take the money back from the corporations, the profits back from the corporations, so that this stuff wouldn't happen anymore.
But we're never going to blame the corporations.
We're never going to blame the industries.
We're never going to blame those people who sell the stuff.
We're going to blame the people who buy it.
Oh, I'm ashamed of myself.
My, my standard of living requires so much stuff.
Your standard of living.
Wow.
It's just, it's, it's remarkable how awful it is right now.
So I came up with this idea that I would live as environmentally as possible for a year and see how that affected us.
So we did this no impact experiment.
We did it.
We live in New York.
We live in the middle of New York City.
Why don't you start a company that makes something and has no environmental impact?
How about that for trying to change the world instead of trying to make sure your own shit doesn't stink or that you don't produce enough garbage to matter.
Think about how dumb this is.
That's not changing the world at all.
That's not trying to get up in the morning and push the stone at all.
I'm going to go camping for a year.
which made it unusual because most people can think of environmental living as some sort of a back-to-the-land thing.
But of course, back-to-the-land is not the right idea when it comes to saving our habitat.
If all of us in New York were to go back to the land, we would very much destroy the land.
We're not biologically consumptive.
This has not got to do with human nature.
Human nature is to do what everybody else does.
That's human nature, that we want to, and it's wonderful.
It's like, I want to be with you.
I want to be the same as you.
I want to love you, and I want you to love me.
That's not bad.
But that's also part of the problem.
I want to be the same as you, and you consume, so I'm not going to be the first not to consume.
But it also tells us- I want to be the same as you, and you consume.
So you see?
We're all caught up in it.
The only reason why I buy a car is because my neighbor buys a car.
Come on.
This is just awful.
If we can move from non-consumption to consumption, we can also move from consumption back to non-consumption.
Maybe we should be talking about this a different way, just to throw an idea out there.
Did I talk about this at all yesterday with regard to binoculars?
So here, just again, these are binoculars from, I believe, the 70s.
I don't know how old they are.
They could be, but they're lights binoculars, which would become Leica afterward.
And they still work wonderfully.
So there's a thing about building things to last forever or indefinitely.
or as long as they're taken care of, as opposed to building things that are designed to fall apart.
And so is it, again, the consumer's fault that the only thing that's available in the American and Western economy are things that aren't built to last?
Things that are single use?
Is that the consumer's fault?
And again, that's what it seems to be.
This is all about consumers making the right choices and then all this shit would be better.
Instead of thinking of ourselves as essentially we are already enslaved to a system that makes an awful lot of choices for us based on the fact that it eliminates a lot of options.
And then you have social media and mainstream media encouraging you to eliminate those options and not even look at them.
And yet it's all the fault of the people.
No, it's the fault of their rulers.
The militarized social media, which has brought us to this precipice, this seeming consumer apocalypse, but it's not, it's not at all.
They are taking advantage of a known end in a population problem, the peak in human population.
They are taking advantage of it.
to lay down a mythology that will enslave our grandchildren.
And part of it has to do with our responsibilities to the species, this unique opportunity we have as a species, the timer that's running out on our species.
The only timer that's running out is on the ability for them to collect as much of this data as possible before there are actually less people alive on the planet.
We need to begin by saying, we're at the end of a failed experiment and it's time to say goodbye to it.
It's an economic experiment, it's a technological experiment.
It's been going on for a couple of hundred years and it's not worked.
It's brought us to this point of crisis.
Then we can start to sanely and intelligently say, how can we live within the real limits that our planet gives us and create a safe operating space for humanity?
Admittedly, we've used our brain in ways that are detrimental to the environment and society, but brains are beginning to get together around the planet to find solutions to some of the harm that we've inflicted.
Brains around the planet?
Maybe it's like a techno-sphere.
Right?
It's all the smart people in the world are now connected through the internet.
So we're going to have a gain of function like never before.
And finally, all these people are really just going to solve all the problems for us.
Using AI, of course.
Problem-solving species.
We always do pretty well when our back's to the wall.
The planetary brain!
The planetary brain, Mark!
That is exactly what we were talking about with regard to Desjardins and the phenomenon of man, the idea that we would come together as a species and start to have a species-wide vision of the future.
A giant social brain or planetary brain, because it's in the physical form of the internet.
It looks so much like a nervous system, you almost can't miss the analogy.
You might say that there have always been a lot of little social brains around the planet, getting bigger, starting to form little interconnections among themselves.
Now, more than ever, you could say there's a unified social brain.
And what is this doing?
It's selling you the idea that social media is now the superpower on Earth.
It's now the superpower, it's supranational power.
And so you better actually acknowledge that, that thoughts of the world can be controlled via social media.
It's a new level of control that has never been before possible.
And it's only possible because currently the vast majority of people in the West and around the world
are acquiescing to the use of social media as a legitimate means of finding the truth and of communicating it with their fellow man.
And that's absolutely wrong.
It's the absolute opposite.
That's from the Blue Brain project where I worked in Switzerland in Lausanne with Henry Markram.
That's all animation probably done with Rodrigo's fills, the guy who put the 12 patch together and also I patched with while I was there.
Even if the overall arc of history is toward an expanded moral horizon, more and more people acknowledging the humanity of more and more different kinds of people, there's always the risk of backsliding, and it can be catastrophic.
From a point of view of strict self-interest, it is imperative that we make further moral progress, that we get more and more people to acknowledge the humanity of one another.
more and more moral progress.
So what they're going to do is they're going to get you to surrender more of your sovereignty to the goals of the collective, which will include, of course, all of your data, your medical data, and maybe even some of the medical choices that you make.
or it will be bad for pretty much all of them.
If we don't develop what you might call the moral perspective of God, then we'll screw up the engineering part of playing God, because the actual engineering solutions depend on seeing things from the point of view of other people, ensuring that their lives don't get too bad, because if they do, it'll come back to haunt us.
So, you know.
If people's lives get too bad, it will come back to haunt us.
Who's he talking about us?
What kind of rhetoric is this?
Kind of half of being God has just been handed to us.
And then the question is whether we'll master the other half of being God, the moral half.
Wow, is that bad?
Oh my goodness, is that bad?
The bad news is that the Enlightenment is sometimes hard to come by, because of human nature in some cases.
Because, you know, we've got these kind of animal minds, designed for very different environment, facing novel problems.
We have animal minds, novel problems, environments,
So the enlightenment part is going to require some real education and reflection and self-discipline that may not come naturally.
It may not come naturally.
We may have to force it.
What the hell is he talking about?
I don't think he's talking about teaching everybody a new biology 101.
That's for sure.
I think what we're up against here is human nature.
We have to reform ourselves, remake ourselves in a way that cuts against the grain of our inner animal nature and transcend that Ice Age hunter that all of us are if you strip off the thin layer of civilization.
So I thought that in an earlier part of this that they actually nailed it for a little bit when they said that we are an animal that runs software.
They actually said it like we are running software on old hardware, but I don't think that analogy was right.
I think what makes the human race in particular such an interesting species is that our long developmental time period allows us to impart on our children all sorts of different software.
We could raise killers.
We can raise gardeners.
We can raise caretakers.
And we can raise vigilant caretakers.
We can raise sheepdogs.
I think that part of it is what makes humans so flexible and also so enslavable and also so malleable.
And I think that is actually what these people really understand.
They want you to think
And this is something that's hitting me right now, and it's a little bit hard to say it in one go.
But what they think and what they want you to think about is their use of genetics to modify the species, when in reality, we are a species that a lot of the software is implanted during childhood and from
our parents and our experiences and we learn from our experience.
And that's what makes us so flexible in so many different environments and so many different cultures and so many different ways that we've solved the problems that we've been put in front of us with teepees and igloos and wigwams and longhuts and skyscrapers.
And they know that in two generations, they could have an entirely different planet full of different humans that thought differently about the world.
They know that because a few generations ago, people thought that sacrificing people and letting their bodies tumble down the stairs of pyramids was a way of interacting with the gods.
And everybody believed it.
And that software was reliably uploaded into generations of Mayan Indians and Aztec Indians.
And so they know that if they can find a way to upload new software onto generations to come, that they will be successful.
And this is not, we're gonna require one ounce of understanding the genome.
Not one, even one ounce of understanding the genome would be required to use social media to fundamentally change everything that your grandchildren were to believe.
Because that's still quite a ways away for some of us.
If I'm lucky enough to have grandkids, it's a little ways away yet.
Maybe we're talking about Mark's great grandkids.
Maybe we're talking about a lot of my audience's great grandkids.
But we are talking about a collective
effort to make us think that they are going to modify the species with genomic tweaking when they all know that's bullshit.
What they're going to do is they're going to modify our species with mental programming by training them on a different set of myths.
And that's going to be pretty hard to do, but on the other hand, pretty awesome if they can do it to the whole world.
And that's what I think social media could potentially allow to happen.
A whole mythology, a whole new history over the next 50 years could be laid down, which explains the current circumstances of the enslaved children of earth 50 years from now has something that has nothing to do with what actually got them there, which will be a fundamental disconnect from our true biology and a fundamental disconnect from what could be an awakening
a real new understanding of who we are as a species, but more importantly, how we really fit into the world around us.
I think this is an extraordinary moment in human history because while they try as hard as they can to score this touchdown, they are inevitably very, very, very vulnerable because it's an illusion.
It's a mythology that can only be sustained with our use of social media.
We always have been the initiators of this experiment.
We've unleashed it, but we've never really controlled it.
But now it's more likely that we're going to come to grief because of environmental problems.
If we do, then that is really nature saying the experiment of civilization is a failed evolutionary experiment, that making apes smarter is a dead end.
So it's up to us to prove nature wrong in a sense, to show that we can take control of our own destinies and behave in a wise way that will ensure the continuation of the experiment of civilization.
I agree.
Engineered failure, that's what I think.
Absolutely.
And they want us to believe it's our fault.
There it is!
Oh my gosh, they're telling us!
They told us with this analogy.
Holy shit, can you see it?
Engineered failure.
Are we gonna be as dumb as the chimp and not figure it out?
Do you see this?
Do you see this, how cool this is?
Stop it.
Do you see how cool this is?
They are actually telling us right here.
The message is implanted in the movie from the beginning when they showed us this problem where the chimp can't seem to figure out that the thing is rigged against him.
We actually have to figure out that civilization has been rigged against us all along, or at least for the last hundred years or so, certainly for the last 50.
And once we start to realize that civilization has been rigged, then we will realize that the whole depopulation was a myth, the whole overpopulation is a myth, and maybe even the, you know, everything is just one big malevolent show designed to take the reins of the evolution of the species
and to have our grandchildren be hopelessly, blissfully unaware of their enslavement by a mythology about their biology, a mythology about their world.
Oh my goodness, and about the dominance of the techno state that's making all the fuel with engineered biofuels and stuff like that.
Boy, I guess if pharmaceutical companies make 50 billion a year and ExxonMobil makes 700 billion a year, then I guess it makes sense that the Human Genome Project would try to go into biofuels rather than pharmaceuticals, don't you think?
It would make sense that the human genome project would go that way, that all the genome project is going that way.
Why?
Because it's all one signal.
They know in their heart of hearts that there's no divorcing us from the bacteria and the bacteriophages that they communicate with and interact with each other with.
There's no getting rid of that background signal, that we are dependent on that background signal.
We are symbiotic with it.
Perhaps we are even an emergent property of it.
which is all part of this, you know, the reason why this evolutionary phylogeny is just dumb when it's tied to molecules and enzymes, which is what they do to tell us this story that we all share a chemistry and therefore we're all just basically spontaneous chemical interactions that happen on a rock that's a certain distance from a star and everything else just happened to happen.
Understand, we can figure it out.
We can figure it out.
Why the task is unsolvable.
I mean, he's saying it right there.
The chimp argument, the guy who argued with us or told us this story said that chimps can't do it, only kids can do it.
That chimp's doing it right there.
He's looking in the camera saying, this one doesn't do it, that one does do it.
You guys are fooling me.
He's telling a story that doesn't even make sense.
It's not even true.
He's essentially a liar and he has to be a liar.
Why?
Because otherwise his research wouldn't get funded.
Because he would not have identified something that chimps can't do.
Yes, I'm making an accusation and I bet it's right.
That if you give them a long enough time or enough experience with it, they would definitely show you signs that they know something's fucked up.
Maybe they're just more persistent.
And a human child is more apt to just start crying or give up and go somewhere else.
Have you ever thought of that possibility?
That neuroscientist apparently hasn't.
Don't let this fool you, ladies and gentlemen.
We are really winning.
We are winning like crazy.
And if you do anything else today, you should definitely watch Mark's show from this morning.
It's really extraordinary.
And it'll make you feel like this monkey.
It'll make you want to get out.
Get off of social media.
You can't win there.
It's rigged.
That's the whole point.
I don't know what to say, guys.
I think we're really... Oh, I was already in there.
That's right.
This is a current slide.
Thanks very much.
I've got a little music to play and then I'll be back for closing.
So if you've got other things to do, I understand that you wouldn't stay around for this.
I totally get it.
Thanks very much for being here.
See you in a minute.
Mm.
so
about pandemic.
And Stephen, your immunology professor said very good, because the question was very good.
And of course, as I've been trying to say for four years now, there is no pandemic, there was no pandemic, and there will be no pandemic.
And
It's like Jay said, the RNA can't pandemic.
It can't.
And there's no reason to discuss this anymore because it's clear.
And if it's clear, we shouldn't waste time talking about it.
But you can tell if someone's lying, you know, you can sort of feel it in people.
And I have lied.
I'm sure I'll lie again.
I don't want to lie.
I don't think I'm a liar.
I try not to be a liar.
I don't want to be a liar.
I think it's really important not to be a liar.
The specializations should make you suspicious because if it's gotten harder to evaluate what's going on, then it's presumably gotten easier for people to lie and to exaggerate.
And then one should be a little bit suspicious.
And that's sort of my starting bias.
Think, but you can tell if someone's lying, you know, you can sort of feel it in people.
And I have lied.
I'm sure I'll lie again.
I don't want to lie.
You know, I don't think I'm a liar.
I try not to be a liar.
I don't want to be a liar.
I think it's like really important not to be a liar.
Think, but you can tell if someone's lying, you know, you can sort of feel it in people.
And I have lied.
I'm sure I'll lie again.
I don't want to lie.
You know, I don't think I'm a liar.
I try not to be a liar.
I don't want to be a liar.
I think it's like really important not to be a liar.
Ladies and gentlemen, they're all in the same script and you can't change it.
None of them say murder.
None of them mention that supplemental oxygen induces acute respiratory distress syndrome.
None of them mention that ventilators were used to stop spread.
None of them mention a lack of antibiotics used being murder, especially in America, especially these doctors from around the world who could, anybody could say that.
And they're not saying that this multi-year opioid crisis in America is not a ignorable number, but instead oftentimes ignore it on purpose.
And none of them mentioned Brandy Vaughn, even the ones that have been on stage with her and heard her very distinctly explain the difference between injection versus ingestion.
Even somebody like Brian Hooker
who heard me say that intramuscular injection is just plain dumb, never pointed out that Brandy Vaughn was there too.
None of them have explained PCR as a fraud in terms of diagnostics, not even somebody like Brian Hooker who has 16 years experience as a genetic modifier of plants to make medicine.
Yeah, very similar to them talking about in that movie we watched today about genetically modifying algae to make biofuels.
no mention of the population pyramid as a problem needing solving or as a source of an anticipated rise in all-cause mortality that could be used to create a mythology about something else.
And I think that's what they did.
They did that by not saying murder, by not mentioning any of these things.
These people have essentially tricked a lot of adults
into believing this mythology and going along with public health as the solution.
But you can tell if someone's lying, you know, you can sort of feel it in people.
And I have lied.
I'm sure I'll lie again.
I don't want to lie.
You know, I don't think I'm a liar.
I try not to be a liar.
I don't want to be a liar.
I think it's like really important not to be a liar.
The nice thing about it is, is I was really starting to feel like this part of the story is now solid because you can also see the interesting connection with India, India in drastic India in the, uh,
in the sort of history of Li Min Yan and India in the history of Steve Bannon, India in the history of the vaccines that Malone was brokering and that
Peter Hotez was brokering and the potential for genetic and medical data from India, the potential for the continued production of goods in India as opposed to China in the decades to come, the consumers in India, the whole connection with
with the guy in doing the Fomotidine trial and India and Robert Malone.
It's just an overwhelming amount of evidence now suggests that this, you know, Russia, Russia, Russia, China, China, China.
And the one time I got any attention from Michael Sanger and promoted by anything was because of the Scooby-Doo, which of course were to blame the lab leak on China.
Were it to blame the lab leak on China, the Scooby-Doo was a great idea.
Were it to blame the lab leak on North Carolina now, it would probably be okay.
Because again, we're solving a mystery.
Is it North Carolina and China?
Seems like that would be a great outcome for a lot of these people that are interested in controlling this narrative and taking over by throwing out the FDA and reorganizing all the fundamental principles of American law around intellectual property and all to hide this scam.
They just murdered people and lied about it in order to start to lay the foundation of a new mythology, a new fundamental understanding that they would be eventually giving to our grandchildren.
This is a long-term plan to bamboozle our grandkids.
A lot about isolation and purification.
Can you tell me what the difference is between the two?
Isolation?
What was that?
Isolation and purification.
Of the virus?
Yes.
Well, you isolate a virus by finding the virus which causes a disease.
You purify a virus by making a lot of, I mean just by purifying it so you get a pure virus.
I don't understand what the issue is.
I see.
No, it depends on how they use it.
Can you explain the process of HIV isolation?
Well, didn't Dr. Gallo do that?
I mean, he actually isolated it, so... I mean, why should I do all of this?
This is all textbook stuff you're asking me.
So make no mistake about it, Robert Malone worked with an associate of Robert Gallo named Murray Gardner, and that's not by accident that this is all one malevolent show with people descended from all of the same
essentially the same mentor chain that might even go all the way back to Hilary Koprowski.
This is GigaOM Biological, a high-resistance, low-noise information brief brought to you by a biologist.
A spectacular commitment to lies is all that's required.
It was an anticipated rise in all-cause mortality that was sculpted using murder and lies for a couple years
and lied about around the internet.
That's how we got where we are.
These are some of the people that I think are involved.
Mark did a great show about Piper Stover today.
He's got a new link on his website.
It's more than these obvious players.
It's the entire Western world and all the money to powers in it that are
and grubbing for a place at the table.
And that's why they need you to accept injection as medicine when it is in fact dumb.
And that's why they have all of these, these, these organizations like Brownstone.
What an awful organization.
They send emails that have more than five donate links in them because you know, they need more Brownstone fellows to do, to do podcast appearances on Rumble.
It's really gross.
And it's all to protect the illusion of bad biology 101 that the Human Genome Project is based in that is essentially an elaborate PSYOP.
I mean, the Human Genome Project was mostly salesmanship about what could be done, what will eventually happen, and it's not happened yet.
And it will not happen because we are an irreducible complexity, a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time, and we know nothing about that yet.
Instead, we've been told an elaborate hoax about endemicity and pathogens that can roam the world for years.
And there's a fake anti-vax movement in America that has a lot of people under their spell.
And this is a big, big, big problem because some of our kids are under their spell.
This was a background of irreducibly complex signals that was misconstrued as some novel spread using nonspecific PCR tests to make us believe that these things were real.
When in reality, what we were doing is giving them all the samples they need, all the data they needed,
from all of our college kids to start using AI to try and do a first run to see if they can take the database of Epic and interface it with all that genetic data that they collected from all those college kids and figure out if they can match those database records with the genetic records because that would be a first step in terms of priming
any particular machine learning algorithm to try and solve a more detailed puzzle of a similar nature.
Again, remember, this is an iteration.
This is the next version of the solving of the game of Go, but the new game is the Human Genome Project.
Of course, it's not going to happen, but that's the plan they have.
And they need you to believe in their ghosts and believe that you're a ghostbuster in order for this to work.
So don't teach that to your kids.
RNA cannot pandemic intramuscular injection is dumb.
Transfection and transformation was always a crime and healthy people and the population pyramids do exist.
Look them up.
Thanks very much for being here.
I'll see you tomorrow.
We're probably not going to do a show like this every day anymore because it just seems like
Mark and I are really now starting to scrape our face against the brick wall.
And so it's not really up to us anymore to keep trying to sell you with new pieces of evidence that all just happen to line up exactly like this.
Anybody could have found Piper Stover.
Anybody could have done that, but only Mark did.
Not Matt Crawford, or Brett Weinstein, or any of these people that knew me for five years and were trying to figure out what was going on.
Who is that guy?
No private investigator has ever... No George Webb exposure on... That's probably the best example.
No George Webb, no John Cullen, no Kevin McCairn, no Charles Rixey expose.
on Piper Stover and her connections to the CCP or to the deep state or to Craig Ventner at all, at all, at all.
And that's because it's all one malevolent show, ladies and gentlemen, all one big show.
And Mark and I ain't in it.