Tag Archives: scientism

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. Cracked.com 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 Cracked.com 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, Kaspi.tv 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: https://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/SC/Views/Exhibit/narrative/doublehelix.html

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

The 5 Greatest Things Ever Accomplished While High: http://www.cracked.com/article_16532_the-5-greatest-things-ever-accomplished-while-high.html

DNA strain: http://www.kaspi.tv/files/dna-strain.html

DNA imaged with electron microscope for the first time: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22545-dna-imaged-with-electron-microscope-for-the-first-time/

Bill Nye the Fall Guy

I watched a Youtube video titled “Flat earth denier Bill Nye caught up in lies! GAME OVER 2017”. It shows a few clips of people in the main stream starting to turn against Bill Nye the Science Guy.

The video starts off with Joe Rogan saying “scientists are all going after Bill Nye.” Then Rogan’s guest, I don’t know who that is, responponds “Bill Nye the Weimar Guy?” Referring to the decadent Weimar republic that preceded Hitler’s National Socialist Germany. Rogan and his guest also mention that Bill Nye is not even a scientist, and he’s a conman. They’re also pointing out that back in the nineties Bill Nye’s program said that gender comes from chromosomes, but now his TV show is pushing the liberal gender fluidism crap. These are valid points of course, but then there are a couple of comments that make the lightbulb in my head go off.

Rogan’s guest says Bill Nye has fallen into an ideology that is complete religion. Joe Rogan says Bill Nye’s been “influenced”. At least Rogan’s guest says Nye is getting rewarded for it, but I don’t know if Rogan and the other guy go into it in more detail in the full interview. However at least here they make it out to seem like Bill Nye is pushing this liberalism propaganda because he’s “drunk the cool-aid”. This is complete BS, of course. Bill Nye is an actor, and he’s merely doing what he’s being paid for. I don’t know if he really believes any of the gender fluid crap he’s pushing now, or if he cares. He’s clearly being influenced by the producers of his TV show, who want to push this propaganda. I doubt Nye himself has much power to decide the message of his show himself.

What’s interesting is that this establishment puppet Joe Rogan is pushing an anti-leftism angle, and attacking one of the puppets of scientism and leftism. I cannot say Rogan is controlled opposition, since I don’t think he’s even pretending to be opposition, but he is controlled. It seems now the establishment is starting turn the social engineering around. They have an army of brainwashed liberals, and now they want to manipulate others into a suitable right-wing counter-reaction.

I wrote back in 2015: “What is happening today in the West bears an eerie resemblance to what the alleged Freemason Albert Pike supposedly described in his letter to Giuseppe Mazzini over a hundred years ago.” The infamous letter of course details that The Powers That Be plan to unleash the nihilists and the atheists so the decent people would react to defend themselves against these “destroyers of civilization” and eradicate them. I think they are preparing us for this eradication of the “nihilists and atheists”.

The point of this far-left liberalism was never to turn the whole West into a Marxist “paradise”. It was to weaken the West to transform it into something else. Like the alchemical Solve and Coagula, dissolve and coagulate. First the left dissolves the West, and the new Right will coagulate, or form, it into a new image. It doesn’t matter whether your ideology is far-left, far-right or even far-center if you are being controlled by the people who created the problem in the first place.

Over the years I’ve heard conspiracy claims here and there that the elites are actually secret Nazis, which of course sounds like a baseless accusation seeing that Zionists Jews wield a lot of influence in the world and Hitler is the most demonized person in the world, yet things like this make me think maybe this has all been an eloborate conspiracy to Nazi-ize the West. Like Joe Rogan’s anonymous guest said: Bill Nye the Weimar Guy. This is fairly blatantly pushing the narrative that we live in the decadent Weimar republic and it’s only natural to become more National Socialist-like to fight against it. Moreover, in just 5 years more people have become sympathetic toward the Nazis, mainly due to Islamic immigration into the West and the troubles that it brings. So this makes me think, what if there is something to these crypto-Nazi conspiracy theories?

To clarify, I have described myself as Nazi-sympathizer, meaning I do think that the National Socialists and Hitler have been unfairly maligned, and I’ve thought for years that the Holocaust narrative is a lie. Yet I am not convinced that Hitler was a great hero either, the saviour of White race, or anything like that. I don’t know if he was genuine in his efforts, a Rothschild agent, a British agent, a Freemason, or what. At best though, he was a loser with good intentions, but his actions in the end worked against the German people, and the West in general, as his failure to win the war has greatly strengthened the “internationalist clique” that he supposedly fought against.

To get back on topic, I think Bill Nye is being set as a fall guy for fake science and leftism in order to allow other kind of fake science and socially engineered agendas to flourish. The elites create these golemic strawmen, such as Feminism, give them power in order to tear them down after a while in order to further other agendas. A lot of people finally see liberalism as a deluded lie now after it has caused a lot of damage, but they will most likely fall for the next delusion that is waiting around the corner.



Flat earth denier Bill Nye caught up in lies! GAME OVER 2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eonqHPPqWjo

How Albert Pike’s letter can aid us in the Nationalist Revival: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2015/10/14/pikes-letter/

Consensus Reality

There are three types of reality; objective reality, subjective reality and consensus reality. Or perhaps more accurately there are these three ways of perceiving reality, and only of them is reality (objective reality), one of them is something in between (subjective reality) and consensus reality is not reality at all. It is an ephemeral construct used for a purpose for a period of time, at best. A mass delusion leading to centuries of murder and enslavement at worst.

Objective reality the reality which exists regardless of us. Something is real even if you and me aren’t. What that is, is another question. Presumably we exist in the objective reality, however we perceive it, for the most part, in our subjective way, which often skews our perceptions in some way. Then there is consensus reality, which is basically only an idea shared by a group of people. The idea may have been devised by a single individual and infused onto others, or it may have been created equally by all participants.

We hear things like the “scientific consensus” on this matter is so and so. It is an oxymoron. A scientific fact, nor a truth, can ever be deduced by a consensus. A truth is a truth, whether or not everyone or no-one believes in it. Consensus belongs to the sphere of politics or hobbies. A group of politicians may come to a consensus on how to enact a certain policy, a group of friends may decide to go play ice hockey together on the weekend. A consensus pertains to decision making, which hopefully is based on some degree of truth, but you cannot have a scientific consensus. The truthfulness behind the decision to play ice hockey would be something like everyone within that group enjoys it. The truthfulness behind the policy is that everyone deciding on the policy benefits from it. A scientific consensus, however, works only the lines of everyone here believes the earth is flat, those that disagree are killed. There, we have a consensus.

If several different researchers come to the same conclusion independently, it is laudable. Hopefully it suggests their findings are correct. However, even if they discuss the findings together and find they agree, does not make it a scientific consensus. The fact that the objective truth and the consensus coincide is coincidental. You can never deduce what the truth is simply by looking at the consensus. All you find out that way is what the consensus is.

Religions, including scientism, which is religion masquerading as science, usually try to convince you that their consensus is reality. They tell you to follow their dogma, and ignore your own reason and intuition. Trust their hierophants and doctors. Even if what they are saying is true, they dilute the truth by trying to make you forgo your own understanding of the matter, and merely follow their consensus teachings. Ultimately, these consensus religions try to convince you that the artificial ideas of man is more important than the natural, or spiritual, reality.

Believing in a consensus is not wrong in itself. We all can, and should, come to an agreement with other people in various issues. However, consensus is related to deciding on a course of action; do we buy a new car or save the money? Matters of taste can be a consensus issue too; you and your mates may agree that Megan Fox is prettier than Natalie Portman. I don’t think any objective truth can be reached on that issue. When you are trying to find scientific and even deeper truths of our world, is when consensus should be discarded. A consensus fits a scenario when a group of researchers are trying to decide on the best course of action to research a complicated issue. A springboard for truth, but once you are getting close to the truth, or believe you are, you must leave all consensus behind.