Category Archives: Spirituality

How about DNA, is it another occult hoax?

Previously I wrote about the occult connections of the Copernican heliocentric model and the Big Bang. I’ve seen and heard others discuss them previously, but there’s one thing I haven’t seen questioned, at least not much, that is DNA.  We’ve all seen cartoon images of the double helix of DNA, or as the U.S. National Library of Medicine website writes: “The double helix has not only reshaped biology, it has become a cultural icon, represented in sculpture, visual art, jewelry, and toys.”

It’s commonly understood that the DNA double helix resembles the ancient symbol of the Caduceus with intertwined twin serpents around a pole with wings. The symbol is called the staff of Hermes, the Greek god. It is associated with astrology and alchemy. It is also associated with medicine, but according to Wikipedia that is an incorrect use. The Rod of Asclepius, a Greek god of healing, has only one serpent around a pole and no wings, is what they should be using.


This obvious similarity between the DNA and the Caduceus suggests one of three things: it’s a co-incidence, the ancients somehow knew about DNA, or modern science purposefully inserted this occult symbol of a pagan god into our minds as being part of our very flesh. I don’t think it is a co-incidence.


Discovery of DNA

James Watson and Francis Crick “discovered” the DNA in the fifties. The U.S. National Library of Medicine website, interestingly, writes as follows:

“Drawing on the experimental results of others (they conducted no DNA experiments of their own), taking advantage of their complementary scientific backgrounds in physics and X-ray crystallography (Crick) and viral and bacterial genetics (Watson), and relying on their brilliant intuition, persistence, and luck, the two showed that DNA had a structure sufficiently complex and yet elegantly simple enough to be the master molecule of life.”

They didn’t conduct their own experiments, but they managed to discover the double helix structure? Moreover it’s commonly known that Francis Crick was inspired by LSD to make his great discovery. It sounds more like something an artist or a weird religious person would do, get an epiphany by doing drugs. That’s hardly the scientific method. even mentions that Crick was a fan of Aldous Huxley’s, a well-known or well-alleged transhumanist-globalist mastermind, Doors of Perception.

The phrase double helix in interesting too. Accoring to the Online Etymology Dictionary a helix is “a spiral thing”. It comes from the “Greek helix (genitive helikos), a word used of anything in a spiral shape (an armlet, a curl of hair, the tendril of a vine, a serpent’s coil)”. A serpent’s coil, you say? The DNA resembles the coiled twin serpents of the Caduceus. Notice a pattern yet?


The Enmity with the Serpent seed

Things like these make me go, hmm, maybe the Bible was right all along. Genesis 3:15 states:

“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel.”

Maybe God intended humans to have a single helix DNA, but because of the serpent’s genetic involvement now we have double: seed of the woman and seed of the serpent.

Another thing is that the DNA is sometimes called a ladder, and is associated with Jacob’s ladder. The ladder is also a part of Masonic iconography. Perhaps they knew something, or perhaps they wanted to insert their occult beliefs into our biology.

The person in the center in the picture below is holding a key. The article writes: “LSD. Yes, when not discovering the key to life, and winning the Nobel Prize for it, Crick spent the 50s and 60s throwing all night parties famous for featuring that era’s favorite party favors: LSD and nudity.” DNA is the key to life. Looks like Crick just was pushing Freemasonry for the uninitiated.


Referring to the Caduceus, or staff of Hermes, Wikipedia writes: “It is said the wand would wake the sleeping and send the awake to sleep. If applied to the dying, their death was gentle; if applied to the dead, they returned to life”

It basically reverses things. I wonder if the staff could turn men into women and vice versa? Freedom into slavery? Victims into aggressors? If we take the wand to refer to modern science, it has certainly put many rational people to sleep by conving their spiritual beliefs are nonsense, and it has awakened people who lack reason to acknowledge we cannot explain the existence of the world and life itself without some sort of creator to think themselves rational.


How does DNA look like?

I suppose I had always assumed that Crick and Watson managed to look at human tissue samples with a powerful microscope and saw DNA, or something to that extent. Now it does not seem like that was the case. I tried to find pictures of DNA on the internet, but much like pictures of outer space from NASA, they are cartoons or CGI images.

For example, has this image and a four second video showing the DNA double helix. At first I thought it might be actual video of DNA taken through a microscope, but it says it’s computer generated.


The New Scientist website has an article from 2012 titled “DNA imaged with electron microscope for the first time”. So DNA was discovered 60-years ago but that was the first time it was imaged? So all of the scientists and medical students who were taught in universities that DNA is shaped like that were just basically told to take their word for it? Or they were able to see it microscopes themselves, but they just couldn’t take photographs of DNA prior to 2012?

The article has these pictures:


The first one resembles the double helix slightly, but certainly is not identical to the images we are used to seeing. The second one looks like CGI to me, and it has two pillars like Jachin and Boaz of Freemasonry. The article seems to suggest though that they are actual images, not CGI: “Now an electron microscope has captured the famous Watson-Crick double helix in all its glory, by imaging threads of DNA resting on a silicon bed of nails.”

The electron microscope capturing the double helix presumable means they took a photo of it.



I find the DNA double helix hokey as heck. I am not saying it’s definitely a hoax, but I am highly skeptical. I do think that modern science has a real understanding of genes. I do think GMO manipulation is real, and supposedly DNA tests can reveal whether two people are related and so on. I don’t think that it is all fake. The makeup of the DNA though, looking allegedly like the Caduceus, I think is an occult hoax. Just the lack of pictorial evidence, and these occult themes, drugs, references to Aldous Huxley, around the concept of the DNA suggest that it is not science, but religion.

Much like outer space, it seems that the inner space too is a fabrication of talented scifi-authors masquerading as scientists.


I should give credit where it’s due. The reason I wrote these last three articles was partially inspired by videos by Youtube-channel the Truth is stranger than fiction. He has said some of the arguments in his videos I’ve used here, but I cannot link to any specific video since I don’t recall what he said and where. Just check out his channel if you haven’t done so already.




The Francis Crick Papers:


The 5 Greatest Things Ever Accomplished While High:

DNA strain:

DNA imaged with electron microscope for the first time:

Big Bang is an occult concept known as the Cosmic Egg

Last time I wrote about the Kabbalistic ideas behind the Copernican model of the solar system, and how the Catholic church did not seem to have a problem with these un-Biblical theories. This time I’ll look at the Big Bang.

Although the Big Bang is supposedly a theory, it is commonly heralded as scientific fact in our modern society, and if you question it, people look at you as an uneducated bumpkin or a religious nut. This is quite silly since purely by reason can debunk the claim the Big Bang is a fact, since the event supposedly occurred billions of years ago when there was no life, no-one to observe it. It is at best a far-fetched theory that we can never falsily. At least by comparison the Copernican heliocentric model is more scientific since we should at least be able to verify if it’s true or not; does the earth revolve around the sun, or vice versa? It is not based on non-sensical theorizing of something that might have happened before anything even existed. However, I don’t want to discuss the ridiculousness of the Big Bang any further, since plenty of people have already done it, instead I’ll focus on the occult or religious aspect of it.


Georges Lemaître and the Cosmic Egg

The Big Bang theory was coined by Georges Lemaître, a Belgian Catholic priest. According to main stream history he attended a Jesuit secondary school, and according to many others, he was a Jesuit. Whether or not he was one is not as relevant as the fact that he was a Catholic priest.

The Physics of the Universe website “Lemaître himself called his [Big Bang theory the] ‘hypothesis of the primeval atom’ or the ‘Cosmic Egg’.” Cosmic Egg, that sounds intriguing. What is it? In the Greek Orphic tradition there is the Orphic Egg, another version of the cosmic egg. According to myth, the hermaphroditic deity Phanes hatched out of it. Hermaphroditic, i.e. male and female at the same time, reminds me of the LGBT agenda, Conchita Wurst in the Eurovision song contest and so on.


Wikipedia describes Phanes as having had golden wings, he was male-female deity of light and goodness, his name means “to bring light” or “to shine”. Does it sound like Lucifer yet? Wikipedia also refers to a tradition according to which Phanes had been hatched from the World Egg of Chronos (or Saturn).


“The Secret Doctrine of the Rosicrucians” says the following: “The Germ within the Cosmic Egg takes unto itself Form. The Flame is re-kindled. Time begins. A Thing exists. Action begins. The Pairs of Opposites spring into being. The World Soul is born, and awakens into manifestation. The first rays of the new Cosmic Day break over the horizon.”


Un-Biblical Catholics

The Cosmic Egg clearly is an ancient occult, pagan and/or religious concept. It has nothing to do with science, i.e. gathering evidence by observation of natural world. Ever since I was a child had bought the narrative that there is tug-of-war between scientists and fundamentalist Christians, or science and the Bible. The conflict, in fact, is between two religious systems: occult and the Bible. Science itself seems to have been pushed to the side.

And what is of course interesting is that it is the Catholic church that has been pushing these unscientific, pagan notions as science. This is curious for two reasons: the Catholic church is allegedly a Christian organization that believes in the Bible. That is an old and debunked allegations. Second is that the Big Bang, and many other pillars of modern scientific thought, such the Copernical model and Evolution, are not scientific, are religious notions at best, complete lies at worst.

My point is not to argue that the Biblical account of history and cosmology is the correct one. It’s more that if the Catholics want to pretend Christian, they should not be pushing these non-Christian religious ideas. Moreover, I’d like to see more of actual scientific observations related to cosmology, alas we have very little as the concept of Dark Matter pretty much proves all of modern cosmology as pointless theorizing. So far, the Bible does seem more reasonable than most of modern science, but that does not prove the validity of the Bible either.



Georges Lemaître:

The Physics of the Universe:

Orphic Egg:


Secret Doctrine of the Rosicrucians:


Kabbalistic Origins of the Copernican Model

The Copernican heliocentric model and the Big Bang are the basis to the understanding of the cosmology of modern science. Those who tend to look at things critically have probably found these claims somewhat questionable, and there are claims that these ideas, and others concepts of modern science, such as Evolution, are actually of occult or religious origin. There is also alleged Jesuit involvement in our current understanding of the universe. While there are certainly plenty of material on the internet about this, I decided to take a look at it myself. In this article I’ll focus on Nicolaus Copernicus and his ideas. Next time I’ll look at the Big Bang.

However before I move on, I’d like to share my take on the Jesuits, or the claim you see here and there: “It’s the Jesuits.” Jesuits are actually the first conspiratorial group I ever heard about. When I was a child learned that Jesuits embodied the maxim: the ends justify the means. I’m not sure where I learned, maybe from my parents, but ever since I had had the idea of Jesuits of being some sort of conspiratorial cabal. That was years before I even heard the names Freemason or Illuminati. Then around ten years ago, when I was getting serious about learning about conspiracies and secret societies, I heard from a Christian friend that Jesuits are actually really nice, he said they are sort of like hippies. That confused me greatly.  He seemed to be describing a completely different group from the historical Jesuits. Both because I suppose I associated Jesuits with my former childhood self, and my friend’s confusing comments, I hadn’t looked much into Jesuit conspiracy theories in my conspiracy theorist “career”, but maybe a couple years ago I saw some articles about Jesuit universities.

I’ll this article from NY Times as an example from 2013. It describes how the Jesuit Georgetown college celebrated OUTober, an LGBT gay-parade with students prancing around wearing pink shirts. My friend’s view of Jesuits must have originated from these kind of liberal, tolerant modern Jesuit colleges. The Jesuits have been, and still are, all about pursuing their own nefarious agendas and subverting society’s values. It’s just that the times are different, and they are using different methods nowadays. A few centuries ago they were probably more focused on sequestering knowledge, assassination and more traditional cloak and dagger stuff, now they are putting on a benevolent mask and are engaging in social engineering, such as LGBT agenda.

Yet I still do not agree that “it is the Jesuits”. You see and hear these people saying “it’s the Jesuits and that guy never mentions the Jesuits, so he must be a shill”. The next guy says: “No, it’s actually the Freemasons. You’re the shill.” Whereas the third guy claims: “It’s the Jews.” I think these groups, and many others are part of the secret society control system, but I do not know who or what group is on top of it all, nor do I trust anyone who claims they know the truth, unless they are a member of the group that rules over all other groups.


Copernicus and Kabbalah

Let’s move on to Nicolaus Copernicus and the heliocentric model of the solar system. Before Copernicus’ theories, most Europeans believed in the geocentric Ptolemaic system. According to Wikipedia, Copernicus had formulated his theory already in 1510, but his book “On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres” was published after his death in 1543. Interestingly in the Controversy-section of the article it states:

“The immediate result of the 1543 publication of Copernicus’s book was only mild controversy. At the Council of Trent (1545–63) neither Copernicus’s theory nor calendar reform (which would later use tables deduced from Copernicus’s calculations) were discussed. It has been much debated why it was not until six decades after the publication of De revolutionibus that the Catholic Church took any official action against it, even the efforts of Tolosani going unheeded. Catholic side opposition only commenced seventy-three years later, when it was occasioned by Galileo.”

I suppose the Catholic church created the controversy on purpose, since Copernicus’ theories had not caught on in the regular people. So they turned Galileo into this oppressed anti-hero basically to advertise the Copernican model as the new and exciting thing that the establishment supposedly is afraid. Sort of how they got a lot of people, myself included, to support Donald Trump. (Although my support of him wasn’t really so much because the establishment pretended to hate him, but because of Hillary Clinton and Pizzagate, but that’s another story.)

Let’s get back to Copernicus. His book was called “On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres”. Just the name itself reminds me of the Tree of Life of Kabbalah and Sephiroth spheres on it, or the Norse World Tree with the hanging worlds on it.


I used to think this similarity pretty much proves there is some truth to Kabbalah and the ancient myths, but now I am skeptical of the modern cosmology, so I am more inclined to think the “scientists” who have been pushing this model do so because their religion says so. Nowadays many of the flat earthers believe in the Biblical geocentric, domed-model. I suppose I am one of them, but I am happy to admit I could be wrong. There does seem to be some sort spiritual and scientific battle between these two religious concept going on. One of them could be right, and one wrong, or perhaps both are simply religious ideas.

Anyway, the heliocentric model that Copernicus was pushing is rather Kabbalistic. A Kabbala site called Revealing Science of God says: “It should be noted that the 16th century also witnessed perhaps the first scientific verification of Kabbalist teaching with the book written by Copernicus. The Kabbalists never taught the Earth to be the center of the universe, and Copernicus’ discovery proved them right.”

Another blogger on WordPress had written an article titled: “Copernicus And His Kabbalistic Methods”. He quotes Copernicus saying: “Nor is it necessary that these hypotheses should be true, nor indeed even probable, but it is sufficient if they merely produce calculations which agree with the observations…” This sort of reasoning does indeed seem Kabbalistic. has an article states that the Torah, i.e. the first five books of the Old Testament, has a geocentric universe. However, when a “holy” Rabbi Ruzhiner was presented with Copernicus’ theories, people expected him to deny them, however the Rabbi responded as follows:

“When he was informed of this, the Holy Ruzhiner remained completely composed and his response was a very special one. He said that whether the earth revolves around the sun or the sun revolves around the earth depends on the service of the tzaddikim, the righteous Jews of the generation. The answer to the question of “What revolves around what?” is not an absolute answer. If, for instance, the tzaddikim in this generation would serve God in a manner in which it would be correct to see Pluto as the center of the solar system, then in some mysterious way scientific discoveries would adapt to reflect that change.”

Those “tzaddikim” are probably the good Jews who believe in Kabbalah and the Talmud instead of the Torah.

Later on the article gives another example of this: “Accordingly, the variation between geocentricism and heliocentricism can be compared to a difference between a service of God that sees man (on earth) as the center, with God, as it were, revolving around man and caring for all of man’s needs; or perceiving God as the center, whereby man is obligated to God and His commandments.”

According to Kabbalah, it would seem, anything can be anything as long as you can bullshit and fast talk others to believe in it. Even the laws of nature and God are subject one’s ability to make stuff up. I have noticed similar things have permeated all aspects of modern society. Feminism is one example. They say rape is power + privilege, and since White women have them, they cannot be raped. Alternatively, a woman who had consensual sex with man can turn the act post coitum into a rape if she regrets later her promiscuity. Once again, twisting words around can supposedly change reality to suit one’s needs.

I do not know whether Nicolaus Copernicus had studied the Kabbalah, but he did seem to adhere to many Kabbalistic notions. I also do not know if there is any connection between Copernicus and the Jesuits. The Jesuit order was officially formed 1540 and Copernicus died 1543, so it is possible they might have had something to do with it, but I haven’t seen any actual evidence of this.


The Catholics

The Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says that during Copernicus’ lifetime, the Catholic church seemed to be fine with his theories:

“Pope Clement VII (r. 1523–1534) had reacted favorably to a talk about Copernicus’s theories, rewarding the speaker with a rare manuscript. There is no indication of how Pope Paul III, to whom On the Revolutions was dedicated reacted; however, a trusted advisor, Bartolomeo Spina of Pisa (1474–1546) intended to condemn it but fell ill and died before his plan was carried out. Thus, in 1600 there was no official Catholic position on the Copernican system, and it was certainly not a heresy.”

So Pope Clement VII, who appears to have died before Copernicus, reacted favourably to his theories, and the Pope who succeeded him was Paul III to whom Copernicus dedicated his book. Had the Catholic church been hostile to Copernicus’ theories, you might interpret this as a kind of FU from Copernicus, however it does not appear that was the case. There probably were many individuals who did not appreaciate his un-Biblical cosmology, but overall, as Stanford Encyclopedia stated, the heliocentric system was not a heresy.

Interestingly, as is mentioned above, Pope Paul III’s advisor, Bartolomeo Spina, wanted to condemn Copernicus’ book, and presumably he could have influenced the Pope as well, but he fell ill and died. Convenient, wouldn’t you say? Perhaps he was poisoned. His Wikipedia page doesn’t say much, but it says Bartolomeo Spina was involved in prosecuting witches, so he probably understood the Copernical model as the occult concept that it is.

There are some claims that Nicolaus Copernicus may have been a prist. At least he did not marry, and he was a member of the Third Order of Saint Dominic, which is some sort of lay Dominican order. The New Advent website states:

“After his university studies Copernicus practised medicine for six years (1506-1512) at Heilsberg, being sought by bishops and princes, but especially by the poor, whom he served gratis. There is no document to show that Copernicus ever received higher orders. His medical practice, which was only private, would not speak against him being a priest, and the fact that in 1537 King Sigismund of Poland put his name on the list of four candidates for the vacant episcopal seat of Ermland, makes it probable that, at least in later life, he had entered the priesthood.”

So he might have died a Catholic priest. I’ve uncovered no evidence of any involvement of Jesuits with Copernicus himself. The Catholic church, however, did seem be in good relations with him.

Copernicus certainly seems to have been influenced by the Kabbalah, and it was all approved by the Catholic church.

Next time I’ll focus on the Big Bang theory and it’s obvious occult origins.



A Rainbow Over Catholic Colleges
How Georgetown Became a Gay-Friendly Campus:

Nicolaus Copernicus:

One Possible History of Kabbalism:

Copernicus And His Kabbalistic Methods:

Science Versus Torah?:

Nicolaus Copernicus:

Bartolommeo Spina:

Do you have a calling to be Third Order of St. Dominic?:


The Jesuits & The Globe Earth: The Mother Of All Conspiracies!:

Does Astrotheology actually make any sense?

I just finished watching a video (edited) by Eric Dubay titled “Jesus Christ Never Existed”. I wasn’t convinced by the argumentation of the video. In fact, seeing blatant anti-Jesus propaganda like that makes me think that maybe he did. I’ve always been contrarian like that. Ever since I was child I’d thought the story of Jesus is just a silly myth, but around ten years ago when I saw the documentary Zeitgeist, which was trying convince the viewer that Jesus did not exist, because there were allegedly numerous other Gods and heroes in the ancient world whose exploits paralleled those of Jesus. He was supposedly just another version of an older story, so we should just discard him, and possibly focus on the older myths. I however entertained seriously for the first time the notion that maybe Jesus did exist if there were these alleged parallels in the ancient world.

Though now it seems much of these alleged connections between pre-Christian deities and Jesus are fabrications or exaggerations. I am not 100% convinced on these connections either way, but the video by Eric Dubay certainly did not manage to convince me to see it his way since, as usual, they don’t properly cite their sources to show that Jesus was plagiarized from earlier deities. They state a lot of claims, with little proof. Moreover listening to people in the documentary like the late Acharya S. (who interestingly allegedly died December 25, 2015) is a chore. Her smugness and how she despises Jesus and those who believe in him are unbearable. This bothered me even back when I was more receptive to her ideas, but not her attitude.

This isn’t supposedly to be a critique of Eric Dubay or his video, but I wanna mention one thing before I move onto astrotheology. I recently discovered a Youtube-channel, La verdad Absoluta, that claims to expose several inconvenient truths about Dubay. I cannot attest that all of the channel’s claims are totally accurate (and I haven’t watched every video), or that the person making the videos isn’t just on a personal vendetta against Dubay, but I do think it’s worth having a look.



Let’s get to the main event. This is something that been gnawing my mind for a while now. Over the course of many years I’ve seen plenty of videos by people like Jordan Maxwell and Santos Bonacci who claim that the Bible is just allegory for astrotheology, Jesus is merely a reference to the sun, and so on. At first it sounded very profound, but I never really just got it. I didn’t understand what’s the actual significance in veiling stories about the heavenly bodies as events taking place on earth. I thought maybe I’m just dumb, I’m not spiritual enough. Yet now I think that’s actually the point of astrotheology: to make the people who espouse it look smart like veiling fact and mythology among the convoluted BS to confuse you and intrigue you at the same time.

While there are some verses in the Bible that might be interpreted to refer to astrology, such as Genesis 1:14-16:

Gen 1:14  And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
Gen 1:15  And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:16  And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

The “lights in the firmament” presumably refer to stars. Them being for “signs and seasons” might certainly have an astrological reason behind it, since according to astrology doing certain actions on certain days can be more beneficial than on others. The Book of Job refers to the Mazzaroth, that supposedly means the Zodiac. Ultimately I don’t know what is meant by these things, but I mention them to point out that there seems to be some grain of truth in astrotheology.


Jesus and Sun

However, I’ve never really understood the claim about Jesus being an analogy for the sun. First of all, I don’t get how it is supposed to be a great esoteric secret? How does is empower you to “know” that Jesus is actually just the sun? All I see it makes Jesus into something banal. He was supposedly a man who did miracles and rose from the dead. That is quite unique and extraordinary, whereas the sun is something quite ordinary. The sun is important for life on earth to be sure, but it is quite mundane in my opinion, and it is not the way to any kind of salvation. Moreover, what need is there to turn the sun into a man in the form of a myth? If you want to describe the behaviour of the sun during different seasons, why don’t you describe what the sun does? How is it beneficial to come up with stories of a virgin birth, turning water into wine, betrayal by Judas, death and resurrection and so on? It just seems like needlessly convoluted nonsense to me.

Let’s look at Jesus dying for three days and coming back to life and how it is supposedly related to the sun. Jesus died and was resurrected around Easter, i.e. March or April. Astrotheologists claim that the sun dies in December and is resurrected three days later. Notice the difference in months? Jesus does not die in December, his birth is celebrated then, although scholars tend to dispute that Jesus was born in December. Nevertheless the sun “dying” and Jesus dying are at two completely different times. Even if Jesus being born on December 25 represents him being reborn, he would have to be dead 8 months or so, if he died in April.

Even more nonsensical is the claim that the sun dies in December for and is resurrected three days later. Even here in Finland the sun does not “die” for three days in winter. The days get short, but there are 4-6 hours of daylight even during the darkest days. Sometimes in the very far north in Lapland they might have dayless days. We have the concept of “kaamos”, the Polar Night. During that time the sun does not rise above to horizon. It only affects the very north, though. So you might say that the astrotheologists are talking about kaamos in Lapland then. Not really. First of all the Bible was written in the Middle-East and Mediterranean region. I don’t think they have kaamos down there. Why would they be describing the behaviour of the sun in the far north? Even if they for some reason thought the way the sun behaves in the arctic circle is of the utmost importance, Jesus’ death and resurrection is not applicable here.

I found a newspaper article from 2016 marking how long kaamos lasted in Lapland. It says in the northernmost municipality, Utsjoki, kaamos started November 26th and they got to enjoy sun’s rays again in mid-January. Apparently the sun was dead for 52 days last winter, not three days. The article also mentions that it’s not pitch black even during kaamos. Although the sun is under the horizon, it still shines from underneath and some of the light is reflected down via the atmosphere.


Try replacing Son with Sun

One more thing before I finish. The Eric Dubay documentary has Michael Tsarion (whose both names are numerologically 33) saying how you should replace the “son of God” with the “sun” or “sun of God”. I think I’ve heard him say it before, and it sounds smart and mysterious when he says it, but this time I actually decided to heed his advice. For example:

Psalm 2:7 “I will surely tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.

This would be: “I will surely tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to Me, ‘You are My Sun, Today I have begotten You.

Matthew 3:17 and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased.”

This would be: and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, “This is My beloved Sun, in whom I am well-pleased.”

1 John 4:10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

Propitiation apprently means “appeasing a god” or “atonement” so God sent the sun to atone our sins. How does that work exactly? By giving us a tan?

John 5:19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

This would be: Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Sun can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Sun also does in like manner.

First of all, if we take Tsarions’s advice we see the sun speak these words. Moreover, the sun is copying the actions of his father. It sounds like nonsense.

Sorry MTSAR, this sounds like nonsense to me.



The claim that Jesus is just an allegory for the sun is utter nonsense. I feel silly for taking it seriously for a long time. I suppose it was due to the Emperor’s New Clothes -syndrome. When you first “wake up” to the fact that there are conspiracies and that we’ve been lied to about most things, then you find these alternative researchers and they seem so smart and edgy, you don’t dare dismiss their claims, especially since some things they are saying you recognize as true. However, it seems that most of the alternatives we are given are pushing lies, just different lies from the mainstream. The difference between main stream and the alternative is that the latter mixes truth with lies.

When it comes to Jesus, I don’t know if he existed or not. But seeing that there is seems to be an agenda to convince you that he did not exist, or that he’s not important, makes me think the establishment is worried about him for some reason. I wonder why?



Jesus Christ Never Existed:

La verdad Absoluta:

Polar Night:

Kohta alkaa kaamos – näin pitkään se kestää eri paikkakunnilla:

What is the Origin of the Elite Bloodlines?

It seems to be an established fact that there is an elite bloodline, or a mix of bloodlines, that rule our world. Many conspiracy theorists have described 12 Illuminati bloodlines, while I don’t know if the number is accurate or not, I haven’t seen anyone really dispute the existence of these bloodlines. Even main stream society seems to submissively accept that these bloodlines are a fact. For example most US presidents have been related to each other and to European royalty. The main stream media has even dicussed how Dick Cheney and Barack Obama are related.

The question then is why is this royal bloodline significant? What makes them different, why do they always seem to be in power? From what I see, among conspiracy theorists the prevailing theory is that they have descended from the Nephilim, fallen angels, or possibly the serpent from Eden through Cain. There are variations to this, such as they were descended from Annunaki aliens or reptilians, but in the end the narrative is that the elite bloodlines are evil because they descended from evil non-human entities. And I don’t think it’s a bad theory, but it’s still just a theory, so I will propose another one.


Seed of Abraham

Genesis 17:4-8 states:

Gen 17:4  As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations.
Gen 17:5  Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.
Gen 17:6  And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.
Gen 17:7  And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.
Gen 17:8  And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

God formed “an everlasting covenant” with Abraham and his seed to make him “a father of many nations”, and “kings will come out of” Abraham, which presumable means he will be the progenitor of many kings. Perhaps the seed of Abraham still is ruling many nations through his kings. If this is true, and the elite bloodlines of today are the seed of Abraham, then it would imply two different possibilities: either the God that came to Abraham to make a covenant with him was an evil one, or it was the true God and the only way for anyone to rule over the earth is through the seed of Abraham.

In Genesis 17:1 God, or LORD, says Abram (as he was still known) was perfect (or complete, whole, sound, without blemish, or entirely in accord with truth and fact).  This is why God chose to make the covenant with him. Then why are the elites of today so evil and corrupt then? Perhaps that is reason for their generational Satanist, MK Ultra mind control rituals. That is why the Illuminati trannies seem to exist. God had decided that the seed of Abraham will be kings over nations, and the other side cannot change that, but if they manage to control the seed, they can control the world. This might be what has happened. I’m not saying this necessarily true, but I am putting it out there as an alternative.

If my theory is correct, it would be utterly pointless to try start a revolution to oust the elite bloodlines from power. It would be pointless to hate them. The only way to free ourselves would be to free the elites from the mind control.


Canaan and the Goys

Before I finish, I’d like to take a look at a couple of interesting words from Genesis 17. The word “nations” is used a few times. The original Hebrew word is “goy”, which is certainly familiar as the Jews tend to call non-Jews that, and it supposedly refers to cattle. According to Brown-Driver-Briggs dictionary the word has the following meanings:

1) nation, people (noun masculine)
1a) nation, people
1a1) usually of non-Hebrew people
1a2) of descendants of Abraham
1a3) of Israel
1b) of swarm of locusts, other animals (figuratively)
1c) Goyim? = “nations” (noun proper masculine)

Goy means nation, non-Hebrews, Israel, and descendants of Abraham. Does this mean that all of us non-Jews are the true descendants of Abraham and the true Israelites, and the Jews envy us for this?

Another interesting tidbit in Genesis 17 is: “And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession”.

What is Canaan then? According to “Canaan was the name of a large and prosperous country (at times independent, at others a tributary to Egypt) which corresponds roughly to present-day Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Israel and was also known as Phoenicia.”

The Brown-Driver-Briggs dictionary gives the following definitions for Canaan:

Canaan = “lowland”
1) the 4th son of Ham and the progenitor of the Phoenicians and of the various nations who peopled the seacoast of Palestine (noun proper masculine)
2) the land west of the Jordan peopled by the descendants of Canaan and subsequently conquered by the Israelites under Joshua (noun proper locative)
3) merchant, trader (noun masculine)

God promised Canaan as an everlasting possessions to the non-Hebrew seed of Abraham. Canaan was inhabited by the Phoenicians, which was conquered by the goy-Israelites, and became known as Israel. It would seem to me that the modern day Jews are the descendants of Canaan, or the Phoenicians, Brown-Driver-Briggs even mentions how Canaan can mean “merchant” or “trader”. If the information presented above is correct, even the Bible itself would seem to state that the Jews have no right to Israel, Syria or other adjacent locations. In fact, the land was held by the Jews a long time ago, but God decided it should go to the goyim, for an eternity.

It would appear that the Cananite/Phoenician/Jews that pretend to be Israelites want their old land back. That is why Zionism was invented to “return” Israel to the Jews under false pretenses, and why there is a war in Syria right now.

I am not trying to twist this into any kind of “anti-Semitic” narrative. I am merely describing what I see.



Is ruling in the genes? All presidents bar one are directly descended from a medieval English king:

History and Purpose of the Freemasons and other Secret Societies:



The LORD, God and the Book of Job

I was watching Rob Skiba’s latest video, and in it he mentioned a passage from the Bible how there are supposedly “storehouses of snow” (Job 38:22). Skiba suggested the possibility that this should be interpreted literally. I had a look of it, although I had no great insight on its meaning. I did notice something else that is quite interesting in the Book of Job though.

Before I get to it though, I should point out something else. In the Old Testament God is referred to by a few different names. Sometimes it’s God, or Elohim in Hebrew, other times it’s LORD, Yehovah in Hebrew. I think sometimes it’s also LORD God, Yehovah Elohim. The word Elohim is plural, which has led some to interpret it to mean a multitude of gods, or perhaps a pantheon. This may or may not be accurate. Another possible interpretation is that God/Elohim and LORD/Yehovah refer to two different characters.

In Genesis 1, the word for God is always Elohim, and it continues until the beginning of Genesis 2. This starts with God creating the world and ends with him resting on the seventh day. After that starts the story of Eden with Adam and Eve. From then on God is called LORD God, Yehovah Elohim. Possibly these two Gods are two different characters.

Let’s jump to the Book of Job. The story should be familiar, but I’ll recount it quickly. Satan and the sons of God (presumably the same ones that had offspring with the daughters of men in Genesis) came to God, or rather the LORD (Yehovah). Job was a wealthy and happy man with a big family who was righteous, praised God and all that. Satan said to the LORD then that Job only praises God because he is so well off. The LORD granted Satan the power to take away Job’s wealth and eventually even to give him hideous boils. Job lost almost everything and got terribly ill. After a while his friends come to see him. They discuss the reason for Job’s predicament, and Job laments him state, and basically says it’s unfair what has happened to him. He claims to be sinless. Eventually the LORD comes to talk to him as well.

The Book of Job sometimes refers to God as Elohim, and sometimes as LORD or Yehovah. When Satan and LORD have discussions together, the discussion is always with the LORD, not God. Job 1:20-22 says as follows:

Job 1:20 Then Job arose, and rent his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground, and worshipped,
Job 1:21 And said, Naked came I out of my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.
Job 1:22 In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly.


Here it would seem that LORD and God are synonymous. However, when Job refers to God, he says LORD, but when the narrator of the Bible refers to God, he says God. Maybe Elohim and Yehovah are two different beings, but Job doesn’t know it. I’ll get back to that later.

Job 19:21 recounts Job lament his condition:

“Have pity upon me, have pity upon me, O ye my friends; for the hand of God hath touched me. ”

According to the Brown-Driver-Briggs dictionary that is in the e-Sword Bible software that I am using, the word which has been translated “touched” is “naga”, and can also mean “to strike”, i.e. “hand of God hath struck me”. However, more interesting is the notion of hand of God. The word for God here is not Elohim, nor even Yehovah, but “eloahh”. According to the above-mentioned dictionary it has two meanings:

1) God

2) false god

Was Job struck by a false god or God? Or perhaps the phrase “hand of God” refers to a person, like in the Game of Thrones there is a person with a high rank known as the Hand of the King, or King’s Hand. He is sort of like Prime Minister who takes care of important affairs of the king. Might the LORD or Yehovah be a powerful angel who takes care of affairs for God such as Lucifer or Metatron?

The LORD arrives on the scene in Job 38. It is said he “answered Job out of the whirlwind”. First of all, I find this entrance curious. Why would God need a whirlwind or a hurricane to travel? Moreover Ephesians 2:2 says that Satan, or another malevolent character, is “prince of the power of the air”. Using whirlwinds to travel around, power of air…

After that the LORD starts exclaiming how dare Job claim he has been treated unfairly, and the LORD brags about the various feats he can do far beyond the scope of mortals. This goes on for a while. It sounds very prideful to be frank. Now what was Lucifer’s sin, I wonder?

Job 38:6  says:

“Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;”

Isn’t cornerstone something the Freemasons are harping on about? This LORD sounds like the Grand Architect or the Demi-Urge of the world, not the real God.

Let’s continue to Job 38:7:

“When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?”

Morning stars, many Lucifers? The LORD seems to have impressed the sons of God, who are, according to my understanding, the angels who rebelled against God.

Another interesting, although somewhat unrelated piece of information I found was in Job 38:32:

“Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?”

According to e-Sword dictionary Mazzaroth refers to the 12 signs of the Zodiac. Christians tend to think that astrology is of the devil. Maybe they are right, and the LORD is the devil, or if the LORD is actually God, he seems to be proud of the Zodiac.

The last chapter of the Book of Job stars as follows:

Job’s Confession and Repentance
Job 42:1  Then Job answered the LORD, and said,
Job 42:2  I know that thou canst do every thing, and that no thought can be withholden from thee.
Job 42:3  Who is he that hideth counsel without knowledge? therefore have I uttered that I understood not; things too wonderful for me, which I knew not.
Job 42:4  Hear, I beseech thee, and I will speak: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me.
Job 42:5  I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee.
Job 42:6  Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes. 
The Lord Rebukes Job’s Friends
Job 42:7  And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.

The key phrases are: “Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes. And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite…”

Does not the LORD here admit he was wrong, and say he abhors (alternative meanings: reject, despise, refuse) himself? Maybe I interpret this wrong, but this is how I see this. Basically the LORD fell for Satan’s trick, and allowed Job to be tortured. After Job complains about it, first the LORD makes a grandiose show of how dare he, but in the end he admits his mistake. This is not the infallible God.

My interpretation is that the LORD, at least in the Book of Job, is a fallen angel, possibly Lucifer or Metatron, who used to be God’s right hand man, but now pretends like he is running the whole show. Job possibly does not know this, and might be under the impression that whatever the LORD does has been sanctioned by God. Satan appears to be a different character than the LORD though, since they have conversations together.




The goals of our high altitude weather balloon test:

Bible vs Christianity, Illuminati Trannies, and 33

Back in 2014 I wrote an article titled “The Fourth Abrahamic Religion”, which referred to atheism or Scientism. I’m going to look back on how I saw the world differently back then compared to now, and discuss where I was correct and incorrect.

First of all I do still think that militant atheism, or Scientism is part of this continuation often called Abrahamic religions. It’s even more obvious now than it was back then with Social Justice Warriors, i.e. Cultural Marxists, becoming more overt with their crazy schemes. While most of them are atheists and anti-religion, many of them are still curiously pro-Islam. Where I think I was wrong though is that Christianity is just one of those harmful, or digital, religions. Or more accurately I don’t think the Bible is part of these man-made delusions. Christianity might be,


A Tale of Two Christianities

I’m not claiming that this is a completely unique position, since Alexander Hislop wrote similar sentiments in The Two Babylons in the 19th century. Yet he was basically saying that Catholicism is Mesopotamian mystery religions in disguise, but if I recall correctly he had a positive view of Protestantism. I think that most main stream forms of Christianity, and most people who call themselves Christians, are either wittingly or unwittingly worshipping such mystery religions, or they simply have their man-made religion that coats itself in Biblical imagery.

There are basically two types of Christians: deliberately false ones, and apathetically false ones. The deliberately false Christians are Luciferians, Satanists, Jesuits, or crypto-Jews, that pretend to be Christian to fool others. The apathetic Christians do not really care about the greater questions of life. They merely want to be nice and have a nice life without offending others, and acting superficially Christian of simply part of their culture. They honestly believe that their unbiblical lifestyle is what God and Jesus is all about.

Perhaps you could call me hypocritical, since I do not consider myself Christian, yet I am judging Christians. Maybe I am. In recent years I’ve merely come to the realization that the Bible seems to hold more answers than any other source I’ve seen so far.


The Abrahamic Religions

I don’t know if it is accurate or not to call Judaism, Christianity, Islam and atheism Abrahamic religions or not, or if only the people who truly follow the Bible should be called Abrahamic. I don’t want to discuss semantics right now. Perhaps you could say Biblically inspired pagan (man-made) religions vs the religion of the Bible.

Also in my article I was praising animistic and polytheistic religions for exuding life with little evidence to back my claims. Those comments seem silly to me now, and reflect my spiritual bias of the day. It’s not to say that I think that those kind of religions are necessarily bad now either, but I just have very little actual experience with them so I cannot say how they are. I try not to idolize or demonize something I don’t know much about.


Trannies, Fallen Angels and the Flat Earth

In just recent months my change in perspective has allowed me to see some conspiracies from a different, and hopefully more accurate, viewpoint. One obvious clue to the relevance of the Bible is the fact that both actual science and the Bible seem to support the fact that the earth does not seem to be curved into a ball, and is not moving. I still do not have all of the facts regarding all of this, but admitting to myself that the earth is probably flat gives a certain inner peace, instead of resisting it out of the fear of sounding silly or going too far against the grain.

For the last few months I’ve been thinking about the idea the movie They Live presents. Every conspiracy nut knows that the basic idea of the movie is true in some sense, but the trick is to figure out how much of an allegory the movie is, or how literal. Are the shadowy elites really aliens, demons, fallen angels, undead spirits of Nephilim trapped on earth, Jesuits, Freemasons, Jews, or what exactly? Are we being controlled by actual non-human entities, humans possessed by such beings, or simply human beings who belong to secret societies?

A couple of Youtubers might have uncovered some important clues to this question: MrE (nothing to do with Rocking MrE) and Russianvids. Both have made videos of the transpocalypse, which refers to the claim that many celebrities, actors, politicians, even royalty, are actually secretly transgender. The claim sounds ridiculous at first, but when you bother to take a look at some of the evidence, it doesn’t sound so silly. MrE claims that basically any actress who has won an Oscar is a transgender. I’m not sure if I would go that far, but there’s something there worth investigating.

Apparently there are some Youtubers who have been discussing these Illuminati trannies, as MrE, calls them for years. I didn’t know until fairly recently that there is allegedly a tranny epidemic among the rich and famous. I did know that Michelle Obama is allegedly a man. I even wrote about it back in 2014. Back then I also heard claims that tennis players Serena and Venus Williams are trannies. Although I wasn’t convinced back then, at least it would make more sense for two men to pretend female in order to excel at sports, but I couldn’t figure out what would be the point in pulling the deception that the First Lady is a man. I wrote about these alleged celebrity trannies a month ago, but back then I was still somewhat unsure what to think of it. Now I have a better view of things.

First of all, if what people like MrE say is correct, that it is basically the religion of many of these elite families to become transgender like Baphomet, and they’ve been doing it for decades, if not centuries, or even millennia, then it’s “normal” for Michelle Obama to be transgender as well. (S)he probably wouldn’t even have been the first tranny First Lady in America. Another thing is that Kerth Barker, who I’ve quoted in the past, said in Angelic Defenders & Demonic Abusers that the generational Satanist families do habitually engage in transvestite activity, i.e. men pretend they are female and vice versa. I don’t recall him saying anything about them actually going through surgery to transition to another gender, but the basic idea is still the same.

Another thing is that if in fact many of these elite families are Satanists or Luciferians, the old idea of the Black Mass is to do what righteous people or the Bible does in reverse. Russianvids also shows a page from a book by Alesteir Crowley (or his translation of Eliphas Levi’s book?) in many of his videos where Crowley describes how you should de everything backwards. These are things I knew of Satanism and the Black Mass even when I was a teenager. I just always thought they sounded silly so I didn’t pay much attention to it. The idea of backmasking in music has been clearly known for decades even among people who are not interested in conspiracies. But if the Satanists really do engage in doing things backwards, reversing one’s gender does not sound like a stretch at all.

MrE says in many of his videos how the Illuminati trannies are “unclean bodies for immortal spirits of Nephilim trapped on earth” or something to that extent. Quite frankly it sounds reasonable to me.


Numerology 33

Another thing I’ve learned is some practical numerology from Russianvids. I’ve heard over the course of many years many conspiracy researchers say how the Illuminati or Masons love their numerology and they encode things, but I never really got it. I wasn’t sure are the researchers making it up to sound smart or are they talking about something real. Russianvids is the guy who seems to understand numerology, and make his viewers understand it as well. It comes down to recognizing how the Masons encode the 33 into their fake events. Russianvids has countless videos pointing this out. The latest is from the London Bridge terror attack showing plenty of police cars on the scene with the licence plate adding up to 33.

I also like Russianvids’ explanation of the Masonic 33. Everyone knows how 33 is important to Freemasons, but no-one really knows what it means, but according to Russianvids it refers to the third of the angels that rebelled against God. A simple but reasonable explanation. It also explains why these fallen angels, or their minions, would put their brand on everything.

Russianvids uses a numerology program to decode words. I downloaded the same program a little while ago. First I checked out the name of several people I know. None of them were 33, or any other obvious occult number. So it probably is not simply a co-incidence that these numbers are so frequent among the elites. Then yesterday I found some use for the numerology program. There is a newstory of an artist, Dana Schutz, who painted a picture of dead black teen. Then two other artists, or provocators, started protesting the painting, because a White person is appropriating Black culture, or something. These protestors are Hannah Black and Parker Bright. It just happens that “Hannah Black” is 33 in Chaldean numerology. “Parker” is 33 in Pythagorean numerology. “Bright” sounds like a reference to Lucifer. I do believe that this controversy over the painting is a deliberate stunt by the Masons to divide and conquer people. Whites vs Black. Social Justice Warriors vs normal people.



I think most people, even conspiracy minded people, stay away from the “craziest” conspiracy theories because want to bargain with the norms set by society. “9/11 might have been an inside job, but Hollywood actresses are not trannies.” “NASA might have faked the moon landings, but the earth is not flat.” The underlying psychological factor here is that people are trying to run a thin line between reality and acceptability. I will accept this “crazy” but true thing, but I will reject that one, so it evens out. There is always some line people won’t cross to avoid sounding too ridiculous. However the only line you should care about is the line between truth and lies.

And have a gander at the Youtube channels of MrE and Russianvids if you haven’t done so far.



The Fourth Abrahamic Religion:



Is Michelle Obama a man?:

Apparently Hollywood actresses are male:

Why Dana Schutz Painted Emmett Till: