Upcoming Interview: Hybrid Humans: Scientific Evidence of Our 800,000-Year-Old Alien Legacy by Daniella Fenton and Bruce R. Fenton

#41
What I recoil at is the tenet that the human species was altered by aliens at the outset., creating homo sapiens sapiens. Proponents often give multiple assertions, such as "sideways insertion" of genes by ancient aliens., assertions that are simply different ways for presenting the same claim. As Alex implied in a previous interview with Mary, her claim smacks of New Age ideology. There's strange data, for sure, but her interpretation of it is only that. Why not say Intelligent Design? Which is a claim of the same epistemological ilk.

Prior to Dec 21 2012 Mary was with Alfred Webre, and together they stated that on that exact date star kids would give the special code to awaken humanity. It did not happen.

I will never forget the joint interview with Gordon on the data of a massive nuclear explosion on Mars VERSUS how to interpret that. Gordon says, "what if the Mars population were pedophiles, and had to be wiped out?"
 
#42
What I recoil at is the tenet that the human species was altered by aliens at the outset., creating homo sapiens sapiens. There's strange data, for sure, but her interpretation of it is only that. Why not say Intelligent Design? Which is a claim of the same epistemological ilk.
Because this thread's discussion context is not Intelligent Design. Nor is it Creation.

Those are social constructs used to obfuscate categorize and deride, and have nothing whatsoever to do with science. I think that Bruce is going to want to constrain this discussion to evidence and scientific deliberation - not New Age ideology-speak nor social construct buckets.
 
B

Baccarat

#43
As a start, I will lend subjective support to Bruce here...

One thing which I bring to defense of those non-molecular biologists who speculate on the nature of evolution and DNA is this.

Evolution is not a discipline for molecular biologists​
As outlandish as this may sound, such a distinction holds merit nonetheless. Evolution is both an ergodicity as well as a signal theory discipline. Such is not the domain of the molecular biologist. This is the domain of the information and systems engineering specialist. As an analogue, the sound engineer or expert luthier who built my guitar, are not experts in music. Not a one of them can play my 12 bar blues progression I have in mind. You might say 'but they are experts in the building of a musical instrument! How could they possibly not be experts in music?' The simple fact is that there resides a distinction between medium and intelligence. Woe to those who fail to understand this distinction.

If one contends that there is no intelligence to be had in DNA, only medium - then, the discussion with me will end there. Such a person is not equipped (see the necessary graduate work in the first group below) to understand what I have to say, even if they did possess an open mind.

Evolutionary theory is a theory of computation and constraints, and not simply a discipline of molecular biology nor organic chemistry. To that end evolution in a way, is best understood by information and intelligence specialists, and not biologists.

Becoming a Musician

Probability Statistics & Arrival Distribution Theory​
Information and Set Theory​
Biology and Cladistics​
Hypothesis Testing​
Modeling and Theory of Constraints​
Simulation and Sensitivity Theory​
Philosophy of Organized Behaviour​
Computation​
Data Intelligence and Information Theory​
Systems and Value Chain Theory​
Communications Structure Redundancy and Lossless Protocols​
Communications Security and Cryptography​
Advanced Intelligence Networks/Assimilation/Signal Theory​

and less-so the following

Becoming a Musical Instrument Craftsman

Chemistry & Advanced Chemistry​
Organic Chemistry​
Molecular Biology​
Basic Biogenetics​
Advanced Molecular Biology: Epigenetics and Proteostasis
Molecular and Cellular Bioengineering​
Physiology and Tissue Engineering​
Molecular and Cellular Bioengineering Lab​

If we are to seek answers inside DNA, especially with regard to our ability to answer key questions of deontology - then we need the former skills set and to not be ruled solely by the latter skills set. If I am to engineer an apple to be red for 4 weeks rather than 2 weeks, I need the latter group. But if I am to know how the apple came into being, I need the former skills set more than I need the latter.

Collectively we, as a scientific society have failed to grasp this...

I do not want my studio engineer or guitar luthier telling me how to embellish a minor pentatonic nor interpret the lyrics of a song. That is not his/her expertise.
Reminds me when I tell people bill nye is not a scientist, to which they reply "Well he has a degree in mechanical engineering" sigh....
 
#44
Reminds me when I tell people bill nye is not a scientist, to which they reply "Well he has a degree in mechanical engineering" sigh....
He has a BME from Cornell, which is no slouch as a degree. I also love that he promotes STEM careers to kids. ;;/?

But in order to touch on more esoteric subjects, which he pretends to understand and comment upon (as a 'skeptic') - he needs a better founding in the scientific method, philosophy, statistics and hypothesis reduction - exactly.
 
#45
I developed a slightly different perspective of the 2nd Digit of the DNA codex, versus Codon Degeneracy below. This is what Cherbaka and Makukov are all in a tizzy about. They are right. The deliberacy below surpasses a reasonableness test for Intent (per their analysis).

On the y-axis is the nucleon count of the amino acid (tracked by the blue line). On the x-axis is the Codon Logical Slot (1-64) ranked by degeneracy.

There exists a direct relationship between Codon Degeneracy, grouping by the 2nd Digit of the DNA Codex - AND - Amino Acid Nucleon Count. In addition, there is a coherent code comprised by the GCT-Start-Stop progression (the first blue line trend group). Notice that the entire A group bears 'codon degeneracy' ('overstepping' older codex slots). It is almost as if the A group, and its two additional stop codes, were added as an after-thought. However, the A-T and G-C affinity inside DNA base pairing, would rule out that this set appended at a later time - meaning that the entire set of logic had to be assembled at one time.

One will also note that the degeneracies inside the T and G groupings, mirror each other (incredibly) - and the C group bears NO degeneracy at all, while the A group is ALL degeneracy. There is no chemical basis which could serve to imbue such symmetry.

Notice as well that the methionine start (ATG) occurs at slot 36 commensurate with the beginning of code 'degeneracy' (oversteps), while the G group stop occurs at slot 48 and the final A group stop occurs at slot 64 !!! This bias to 12 and 8 intervals cannot be imbued by chemical feedback. This displays Intent.

This is rather extraordinary - and is enough evidence to falsify Earth Abiogenesis, based upon its logical assignment, ex nihilo appearance and timing of appearance in Earth history.

Codon 2nd Digit to Amino Match 2.png
 
Last edited:
#46
Dear Alex,

Could I please request that this interview be focussed on the newest book:

Exogenesis: Hybrid Humans: A Scientific History of Extraterrestrial Genetic Manipulation Paperback – June 1, 2020
by Bruce R. Fenton (Author), Daniella Fenton (Author), Erich von Daniken (Foreword),

This is important because I would be talking about additional material that is not in the older and slightly more esoteric, shorter, and less than perfectly edited book 'Hybrid Humans: Scientific Evidence of Our 800,000-Year-Old Alien Legacy'.

Hybrid Humans is certainly extremely relevant and useful for listeners to read, but it is not the whole story and missed some of the important evidence that later became available. I can send you an unedited pdf of the new book as the manuscript is currently under edit with the publisher.

I am certainly happy to discuss some of the points raised here in the forum:

DNA as technology and/or intelligence & container vs content
Some details on the ETI as I understand it/them
The motivation for such a project as is suggested
Specific markers that I identify as being fingerprints of manipulation
Evolutionary theory from my perspective and how it is changing today (epigenetics, transposable elements, horizontal gene transfer etc.)
The esoteric and consciousness elements of my research and/or 'beliefs'
Clarification on what I mean by hybrid humans and how my position is different to some other ET human hybridization models

Of course, I am happy to discuss any elements that fit the show and will do my best to answer on anything relevant. Not sure I would want to go much into the TTSA topic as it is well covered everywhere and would sap time from the show better spent on my evidence. I will say here I am on the fence about Tom's TTSA project and this is well established by my comments both on Twitter and in a couple of radio interviews. I think I have been fair in criticising where appropriate but recognised seemingly beneficial successes when they occur. I am neither a fan or a hater.

Nice to connect, please excuse my writing here as I am both Aspergers and dyslexic. My sentence structure and grammar suffer but these neurological configurations have given me ways of thinking and mapping data that seem to be relatively unique to people of my disposition. There is a reason why various code-breaking agencies like to recruit a few folks with autism, dyslexia and Aspergers. We may suck a bit at social skills and emotional intelligence, plus writing, but we see the world differently and sometimes can read patterns in evidence that others miss.

All the best

Bruce
Hey dee Howdy there, Bruce. Read any interesting emails lately? ;)
 
#47
"What I recoil at is the tenet that the human species was altered by aliens at the outset., creating homo sapiens sapiens. Proponents often give multiple assertions, such as "sideways insertion" of genes by ancient aliens., assertions that are simply different ways for presenting the same claim. As Alex implied in a previous interview with Mary, her claim smacks of New Age ideology. There's strange data, for sure, but her interpretation of it is only that. Why not say Intelligent Design? Which is a claim of the same epistemological ilk. "

Just to be clear I am swayed by the evidence which points to all life here being of extraterrestrial origin, that DNA is itself an advanced alien terraforming technology. The molecule is complex but it is the code which should really impress all of us, the inherent intelligence within the DNA coding system. I also touch on the evidence for modification around 2 million years ago just prior to the emergence of Homo erectus, which was a fairly big-brained hominin which had anatomy and morphology not too distant from our own. While I think there is also some tentative evidence of an 'upgrade' from Homo sapiens to H. sapien sapiens between 200 - 150 thousand years ago, this is not central to the premise of my work. My focus is on the emergence of proto archaic Homo sapiens soon after 780 thousand years ago.

Most writers in this field have focussed entirely on the period from 200 thousand years ago when academia typically told us the first Homo sapiens emerged. Science has moved on, and these writers are now all shown to be wrong because Homo sapiens has existed as a species for way longer than that. Even very conservative scientists are talking about a range of early transitional forms living perhaps 500 thousand years ago all functioning as ancestors to our own species. This model is now less of a tree and more of a river delta, streams are flowing in and out, diverging, splitting further and then in places coming back together as populations encountered each other and mixed.

Fully anatomically and behaviourally modern humans are in their way 'special' and it may be that somethings was 'done' to our ancestors even around 70 thousand years ago to bring this about, but we would need more genomic evidence to state that as true. I don't personally see we need to factors in ETI to explain the transition from archaic Homo sapiens onwards to us, that could simply be the result of interbreeding between various long diverged populations. The resulting humans could inherit a wide range of novel adaptions, eventually giving rise to a new 'super man'. We did not replace Neanderthals and Denisovans, populations mixed and we are what resulted and with our new 'upgrades' we became uniquely adapted to become the sole survivor.

If I saw evidence of classical intelligent design I would say so, you could apply that case for DNA. It could be argued that DNA is so complex and smart that it was likely engineered by a deity - then again many people think of advanced ETI as being analogous to a god anyway. In the case of humans, we have to be careful always playing up the good, which most writers always do. It is easy to excitedly discuss alien 'upgrades' and how wonderful we all are thanks to these busy little aliens. OR we could ask what damage this meddling has done? The human genome is full of problems, we have a large number of genetic problems and diseases which are unique to our species? We have been 'blessed' with some horrific conditions. There are glaring anomalies not only in the regions which gave us our mighty brains, but also areas that have inflicted us with multiple fertility issues in particular. We should ask what is the benefit of having concealed ovulation, a high rate of mutation in embryos, strangely common spontaneous miscarriage before 12 weeks, horribly painful overly long and dangerous childbirth and many more 'wonders'. We were also not somehow implicitly superior to Neanderthals, Denisovans and other large-brained hominins - this has become abundantly clear in the last few years. They painted, had rituals, made tools, sailed, created art and pretty much did everything we consider signs of high intelligence.

Homo sapiens sapiens ain't so special after all.

A major problem with the discussion of the ET intervention topic is that much of it happened prior to the genetic revolution and even today most of those involved are very unfamiliar with genomics, morphology or even evolutionary processes. That is almost entirely because of the fact virtually nobody willing to discuss these matters has the scientific background appropriate to really do so. In my own case, I am not a genetics expert, I studied Information Systems. I am still learning this subject area for myself and increasing my understanding of almost all aspects, including the complex terminology. With that caveat given, I would say that I am the only independent researcher that has published a book on an alien intervention which does address the genetic evidence directly. There is far more to this story than the 100 or 200 genes found to have entered the human genome via HGT from bacteria, virus, fungi and other organisms. We have to look at specific anomalous genes, areas of weirdly modified code, fused chromosomes that do not mesh well with what is seen in natural fusion events.

There is also much more to my work than simply stumbling on some anomalies and screaming, "the aliens did it!"

I am only involved in this topic because the ETI provided transmission of their story via an artefact they left here, what I refer to in the new book as being a type of Bracewell Probe (a sentinel probe) with Von Neumann architecture (hard AI and self-repair). What I had to do was validate the narrative in that transmission to see if this was genuine or just some kind of tall tale or propaganda - as is the case with many contactee or channelling cases. The proof is always in the pudding if a higher being wants to prove anything they should be able to tell us a story which can be proven true in some significant part (even if not all of it can be validated at this time). My work focussed on three claims, details of the visitor's ship that could potentially lead to physical evidence, claims of a specific mysterious geological event that I might actually be able to track down and of course the claim they modified human DNA. The three events also had to be clustered in time, so the evidence would have to support that as well for it to validate the story. No cherry-picking through the history books to delude myself into thinking it 'might' be true, from the start my intention was that if I could not validate the transmission sufficiently then there would be no book.

Hopefully, that is all helpful and makes my position far more clear for everyone here.
 
#50
Most writers in this field have focussed entirely on the period from 200 thousand years ago when academia typically told us the first Homo sapiens emerged. Science has moved on, and these writers are now all shown to be wrong because Homo sapiens has existed as a species for way longer than that. Even very conservative scientists are talking about a range of early transitional forms living perhaps 500 thousand years ago all functioning as ancestors to our own species.
I had a chat with a real inner plane teacher way back in the late 1970s [i.e. a dead guy chatting to me via my girl friend]. He was of the opinion that humans have been around 2 million years.
 
#51
Hi Alice,

The book is available for pre-order on Amazon 'Exogenesis: Hybrid Humans: A Scientific History of Extraterrestrial Genetic Manipulation Paperback'

Keep in mind it is not delivering until June 2020 as the publisher is working on ensuring my sometimes disorderly writing style is normalised. I recognise that this was a complaint about our self-published title on this topic 'Hybrid Humans: Scientific Evidence of Our 800,000-Year-Old Alien Legacy.'

It is worth mentioning that due to the significant overlap in the content of these two books, I have agreed to remove Hybrid Humans in the very near future. Should anyone wish to gain deeper insights into this research project before June 2020, consider ordering a copy. I can, however, categorically state that Exogensis is a more compelling offering with considerable additional evidence.
 
#54
I had a chat with a real inner plane teacher way back in the late 1970s [i.e. a dead guy chatting to me via my girl friend]. He was of the opinion that humans have been around 2 million years.
Hi Michael,

That would be technically correct, Homo erectus emerged around 2 million years ago, they were humans far more alike to us than to previous hominins. Keep in mind here that all Homo are humans. The earliest fossil evidence of transitional forms with combinations of traits which include some considered to be indicative of Homo is dated at around 2.8 million years.

This spirit evidently considers humans to be anything from Homo erectus onwards and does not make any distinction regarding fully modern forms. In reality, if a Homo erectus hunter sat next to us on a bus, we would likely be intimidated enough to change seats. They were certainly alike to us, but also quite strikingly different.
 
#57
This spirit evidently considers humans to be anything from Homo erectus onwards and does not make any distinction regarding fully modern forms. In reality, if a Homo erectus hunter sat next to us on a bus, we would likely be intimidated enough to change seats. They were certainly alike to us, but also quite strikingly different.
The context of the discussion was in relation to the stream of incarnating souls, rather than physical types. I think meant the remark to convey this is how long what we call human souls has been entering physical life on Earth - and creating a chain of 'spiritual' consequences connected to what we now loosely call 'humanity'.

From our perspective this is a long evolutionary pathway to deliver what doesn't seem to be a huge degree of change. As you say, if we met one today on a bus it might be like sitting beside a bona fide Hell's Angel.

I don't want you to give your game away ahead of your chat with Alex, but several things intrigue me about the proposition that human evolution has been / is being tweaked by ET [whatever that means]. Bear in mind I am in agreement in essence:
  1. Why?
  2. What has taken so long?
  3. If body is what is being evolved, is that evolution linked to psyche? If so, is the primary motive of the evolution to facilitate more complex psychic manifestation?
 
#58
Do you mean my motive for holding this conviction and writing on the subject or the ETI motivation for engineering Homo sapiens?
I kinda presumed you motive was not malign or self-interested. No, the motive for ET engineering humans. I have a very Hermetic take on it all. Don't tell me now. I want to listen to the show with some real sense of anticipation. We can chat off line if you like.
 
#59
I imagine many people will want to know about the motivation of the ETI. That is tackled in my work, but keep in mind that only they REALLY know why they do things. There is a degree of taking their word for it in some places where things are not testable. I am open to the possibility that the ETI is utilising propaganda for their aims, or dumbing things down for humans. I can say the stated motivation is suitably weird, strange enough to reflect an ET mind with a more cosmical understanding rather than simply human projections of what we would expect from an anthropomorphised ET. They are not making slaves to mine gold, or seeking to raid food and water from our world, and they are not interested in invading Earth. It is not like any Hollywood movie plot, at least not one I am familiar with!

It should not shock people to find that the ETI has very big plans that transcend matters typically of concern for the vast majority of little humans on our world. The stated intentions are, however, at least comprehensible (in my view) whether readers can accept them as true or not.

I think many people interested in the Ancient Aliens field are overly married to the idea of Sitchin's space pirates that come here to raid for slaves and gold doubloons. There is nothing like that in my book.
 
Last edited:
#60
[QUOTE="BruceFenton, post: 132867, member: 4396"]think many people interested in the Ancient Aliens field are overly married to the idea of Sitchin's space pirates that come here to raid for slaves and gold doubloons. There is nothing like that in my book.[/QUOTE]

Now that's a mercy. I was reading all of Sitchin's work and becoming more and more alarmed that he was a kook - which he is, apparently.

It should not shock people to find that the ETI has very big plans that transcend matters typically of concern for the vast majority of little humans on our world. The stated intentions are, however, at least comprehensible (in my view) whether readers can accept them as true or not.

Have just finished The Synchronicity Highway by Trish MacGregor, and book I promised to read ages ago and only recently found it lurking only iPhone. That book canvasses several motives for ET intervention, without committing to any - which is a good thing.

I do recall my IP contact trying to deflect my interest by observing that there were "traders" who would, if we left them alone, leave us alone. That was an unsubtle hint. But I had earlier had an 'abduction' experience I would not recall for 25 years until I read an article that triggered instant and intense recall -the 'abduction' experience had been 'edited' out of a memory sequence.

But then, maybe the trader and the anal prober (that's a Strieber reference - I hope - but I suspect not) are two very different classes of what we call ET.

Alex! get this guy on very soon!
 
Top