Evolution of The Self

Evolution of the Self
Anonymous
Copyright © 2010, 2014, 2019
A. Truth Publishing
Anonymous95221@gmail.com
All rights reserved.
Printed in USA
Publishers Cataloging in Publication Data

Anonymous
First Edition
1. Science. 2. Philosophy
Bibliography and References; Index
License Notes: This ebook is licensed only for the use of the person
who downloaded it. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away
to other people. If you would like to share this book with another
person, please download an additional copy for each recipient. Fur-
thermore, the copyright prohibits the copying and/or plagiarizing
of any of the text contained in this book. While some animal re-
search is referenced, the author does not support the use of animals
for research purposes.
Please note that this Ebook does not maintain an index. Any word
may be searched for with the search tool.
Table of Contents
Introduction...............................................................................1
A Spoiled Theory ...................................................................... 3
Spontaneous Generation .................................................................... 4
The Quest to Survive .......................................................................... 5
Awareness and Survival ...................................................................... 7
The Urge to Survive ............................................................................ 7
Chemicals versus Self-awareness....................................................... 8
Accidental DNA Mutation................................................................. 9
Fossil Records .................................................................................... 10
‘The Fittest’ have not always Survived. .......................................... 12
Limitations of Archeological Evidence.......................................... 13
Accuracy of Radioactive Dating...................................................... 18
Mutated Complexity within a Random System? ........................... 22
Accidental Biological Functionality?............................................... 24
Accidental Genes............................................................................... 27
Is Love an Accident?......................................................................... 29
Accidental Evolution Contradicts Life........................................... 31
Who Evolves?.......................................................................... 33
What is a Living Organism? ............................................................. 33
Heart Transplants and Amputation ................................................ 34
Brain Damage..................................................................................... 36
The Recycling of Cells ...................................................................... 37
Body Biochemicals.............................................................................39
Informational DNA...........................................................................45
The Soul and the Self.........................................................................49
Distinguishing Life from Matter......................................................52
Equality among the Living................................................................55
Mind versus Consciousness.................................................... 61
The Theory of Accidental Evolution ..............................................61
Changing our Mind............................................................................61
What is the Mind? ..............................................................................61
Where is the Mind Located?.............................................................64
Mental Health .....................................................................................71
The Electromagnetic Brain...............................................................75
How Consciousness Steers the Brain..............................................85
The Subtle Steering Wheel................................................................95
Conscious Memory ............................................................................97
Subconsciousness............................................................................ 116
The Lessons of Clinical Death...................................................... 118
Out of Body Experiences .............................................................. 120
Transmigration of Consciousness ................................................ 123
An Ancient Knowledge.................................................................. 127
Evolution of Consciousness...................................................135
The Science of Fox, Wolf and Dog Breeding............................. 135
DNA and Birth................................................................................ 140
Evolution and Consciousness ....................................................... 143
Anatomical Changes and the Search for Fulfillment ................. 145
The Evolving Conscious being ..................................................... 145
The Superior Substance.................................................................. 146
A Reason to Survive........................................................................ 147
Learning and Evolving are Linked................................................ 150
The Physical Body Reflects Level of Learning............................ 152
The Physical Body Reflects Consciousness................................. 153
The Physical Body Reflects Past Choices .................................... 154
Our Current Consciousness Determines Our Future................ 155
The Responsibility of the Human Species................................... 160
Our Current Choices Predict our Future..................................... 162
The Real ‘Natural selection’ ........................................................... 164
The Source of Instinct .................................................................... 165
Purpose and Predestination ........................................................... 166
The Programming of DNA ...................................................169
The Singularity Problem................................................................. 170
Was it a Big Accident? .................................................................... 171
No Scientific Evidence ................................................................... 172
Where did the ‘Big Bang’ Particles come from? ......................... 174
Nuclear Energy and the Big Bang................................................. 175
The Precision of Atomic Energy................................................... 177
The Sequential Elements................................................................ 180
Subatomic Particles have Memory................................................ 181
Memory Requires Designation ...................................................... 184
Designation Requires Assembly.................................................... 184
Assembly Requires Programming ................................................. 185
Nature is a Display of Programming ............................................ 186
Repeating Functionality Requires Programming ........................ 188
Programming Eliminates Chance ................................................. 189
Nature’s Events are Connected .................................................... 193
Connected Events are Interwoven............................................... 194
Random Events do not Exist........................................................ 196
Organization Requires Outside Influence ................................... 196
The Soup of the Primordials ......................................................... 197
DNA and Protein are not Spontaneous ...................................... 198
DNA Comes from Life.................................................................. 200
Genetics Illustrate Deeper Mechanisms ...................................... 202
Unpeeling the Source...................................................................... 202
Every Program Requires a Programmer...................................... 203
Personality Originates with a Person ........................................... 204
The Purpose of Evolution..................................................... 207
References and Bibliography.................................................211
Introduction
The next time you happen by an animal or your pet, stop and take a
look into their eyes. What do you see?
Likely, they will be looking right back at you, possibly also into your
eyes.
But what do you see when you look into them? Are they not alive?
Do they not have feelings? If you were to angrily chase after them,
would they not run away, feeling threatened by you? If you were to
hit them, would they not wimper and cry, feeling hurt?
Are these not the very same reactions that we would have under the
same circumstances?
Most people assume that animals, fish, birds, insects and even bac-
teria are not alive in the sense that we are alive. They feel that these
creatures are sub-human, and therefore, they are somehow not con-
scious: They do not think and feel like we do.
This couldn’t be further from the truth. Anyone who has owned a
pet will say that the pet became a friend and even family member.
How could this be, if the animal was not alive in the sense that we
are alive?
The proof is as simple as observation. People will go to great
lengths to make sure that their pet is comfortable. They will spend
thousands of dollars on vet bills, food and shelter for the animal.
Many will sacrifice their time, money, and even where they live and
what they do on their days’ off for the sake of their pet. Why? Why
make sacrifices for some kind of inanimate object?
The fact is, people befriend animals as pets, and animals befriend
humans because we are all living beings. We may be wearing differ-
ent bodies, but we can connect together in a relationship, regardless
of whether one has a tail or not.
Same goes for all the other creatures: birds, fish, insects and even
bacteria. They are all living being within different physical bodies.
1
EVOLUTION OF THE SELF
So we need to change our perspective on living organisms from

other species.
This book will open up an entirely new reality to the reader. This is
the reality that illustrates not only who we are inside these bodies,
but who each of these creatures are within their physical bodies. It
will show that regardless of the exterior body, each body houses a
living being that is qualitatively of the same essence.
Furthermore, this text will prove without a doubt that each of us
has not only been inside the body we are in now, but has been
within other bodies as well, including other human bodies, as well
as the bodies of animals, birds, fish, insects and bacteria.
And we will show that the difference between each of these living
beings is not their physical body, but rather their level of con-
sciousness. Each of us wears a particular type of body according to
our consciousness. And the type of body we wear reflects the evo-
lution of our consciousness.
While we cannot dismiss the work of Darwin and all the other sci-
entists that have progressed the theory of evolution into its current
state, we offer the realities of evolution that make the Theory of
Evolution as currently stated obsolete.
The Theory of Evolution, while useful as our knowledge has pro-
gressed, fails to answer key questions regarding our identity and the
purpose of evolution. It falls short of a clear understanding of just
who we are and the purpose of evolution. Evolution is not a ran-
dom, chaotic progression. It is orderly and purposeful. This text
explains that purpose.
2
Chapter One
A Spoiled Theory
Before we delve into the real evolution of the conscious being, let’s
first review the current theory that prevails among science. It is
commonly termed “evolution theory” or even “Darwin’s theory of
evolution.” Regardless of the name, we are going to give it another,
more accurate name: The accidental physical evolutionary theory.
Why? The current theory of evolution says that the different species
slowly and accidentally evolved from single celled organisms, until
the human machine appeared.
The concept is that the simplest organisms – single celled bacteria
and the like – gradually developed into the different species, which
eventually became human. . It explains that single-celled creatures,
over billions of years, randomly developed multi-cellular functions,
organs, appendages and other more advanced tools for survival.
And the mechanism for such an extraordinary process? Accidental
genetic mutations driven by the quest to survive and nature’s selec-
tion of the strongest species.
These processes have been combined into three partitions:
- Genetic mutation: An accidental alteration of the DNA that produces
a different characteristic or species.
- Survival of the fittest: The ability of the strongest species to survive,
while the weaker species die off.
- Natural selection: The ability of the species to be tied to its environ-
ment, and the environment essentially ‘selects’ those species that
prosper.
Although there is no definite scientific proof for this theory, it has
become broadly accepted throughout modern science, and assumed
throughout much of modern western society.
The theory stems primarily from observations of physical speci-
mens, breeding observations and to a lesser degree, fossil findings.
Its central rationale is the visual similarities between the various
species and their body parts. In addition, observations of slight mu-
3
tations through generations of breeding have illustrated mecha-

nisms that allow organisms to adapt to environments. More re-
cently, modern science has observed various genetic mechanisms
that appear to relate to this adaptive tendency. This genetic refine-
ment of the evolution theory has become known as “Neo-
Darwinism.”
This accidental evolution theory has also been the subject of hot
debates over the last 100 years. Its most outspoken critics have
been fundamental creationists, who teach that all the species appeared
approximately 5,000 years ago when creation occurred.
The creationist history has been scoffed at by many scientists who
consider the many fossils found and dated by radiocarbon dating
systems. This dating system ages some living organism fossil re-
mains at thousands and even millions of years old. Modern science
therefore asks: How could life on earth have been created 5,000 years ago if
the fossil dating systems show living creatures living millions of years ago?
These two diametrically opposed theories have held the spotlight in
the debate regarding our origin over the past century. In the last few
decades, ‘intelligent design,’ has been offered in an attempt to reconcile
the some of the concepts of accidental evolution with the existence
of a Supreme Being. ‘Intelligent design’ accepts the plausibility of acci-
dental evolution together with the notion that it all took place
somehow with the Supreme Being’s involvement.
To understand our past and how we came to exist today we must
be able to view it within the context of a scientific understanding of
our identity and reason for existence. This must be logically consid-
ered together with the evidence. If we accept the existence of the
inner self within the physical body, the context of the theory of
evolution changes. The debate must incorporate this reality. To
assume otherwise would be to claim that living organisms are
merely walking chemical accidents.
Spontaneous Generation
Over the last few decades, since the discovery of DNA, there has
been conjecture that DNA is the key to life and the driving force of
4
accidental evolution. Yet the DNA molecule itself, being comprised

of merely chemicals (nucleotides attached to a sugar-phosphate
substrate) is not living, nor can it create life. Many attempts have
been made to conjure living organisms in isolated chambers by
combining various chemicals. The spontaneous assembly of life
from chemistry has never been accomplished.
The theory of spontaneous generation or abiogenesis, was embraced to
some degree in Europe during the middle ages and Renaissance
periods. The theory held that lower species of life were spontane-
ously generated through exposure to certain elements. Examples
included insects, maggots, and microorganisms.
The later two were thought to spontaneously generate from ex-
posed rotten meat. Around 1660, the Italian physician Francesco
Redi demonstrated that maggots were not generated from meat. In
1768, Italian scientist Lazzaro Spallanzani illustrated further that
microorganism-containing solutions could be sterilized and freed
from microorganisms.
German Theodor Schwann further demonstrated this with experi-
ments in the 1830s. In 1862, Louis Pasteur published findings illus-
trating how unsterile mixtures led to microorganisms while steriliz-
ing and enclosing would prevent such contamination. Uncertainty
remained regarding the generation of microorganisms, however.
British physicist John Tyndall cleared this up by testing sterile and
unsterile containers with light beams, illustrating the relationship
between dust particles and microorganisms. Tyndall’s demonstra-
tions put to bed for good the notion that living organisms could
spontaneously generate.
The Quest to Survive
As the accidental evolutionist theory has been expanded over the
last 100 years, it has been merged with the ‘big bang’ and ‘primordial
soup’ theories. Combined with these ancillary theories, the accidental
evolution theory now states that following the big bang, life spon-
taneously arose from chemicals. What is curious is that these
chemicals somehow developed the desire to survive. Have we ever
5
observed any lifeless chemical or chemicals develop the desire to

survive? Have we ever seen chemicals doing anything but predicta-
bly reacting to each other?
In other words, the accidental evolution theory says that out of
lifeless chemicals, single-celled living creatures have arisen, miracu-
lously displaying a desire to survive. The desire to survive produces
the need to improve survival factors and eliminate threats to sur-
vival, which in turn produces the impetus to evolve. This need to
improve survival comes from an intention to survive, which arises
from survival being valued over non-survival: Life is valued over
non-life.
The value of survival is produced by an innate understanding that we are eter-
nally alive, while being challenged by the possibility of the death of our physical
body.
Eliminating the threats to survival means survival is valued enough
to put an effort into changing, adapting to, or destroying potential
encroachments and dangers that could shorten the life of the physi-
cal body.
These factors compound the problem presented: How could lifeless
chemicals acquire the desire to survive, and then value life enough to take persis-
tent action to sustain it?
As we have discussed, a body is lifeless without the conscious being
present. While the evolution debate has focused on whether and to
what extent our physical bodies have evolved, a complete under-
standing of our existence must consider the nature of the inner self.
It is the inner self that is evolving:
We might study the development of racing cars over the last 100 years and how
they evolved into faster cars, but it would be ignorant not to consider the people
who raced in these cars, those that designed and built them, and the development
of the racing industry which developed around them. The cars surely did not
build themselves; nor did they circle the track on their own.
Since each conscious being has an individual personality, complete
with feelings, emotions, desires and the need to love and be loved,
6
it is essential that this reality is not ignored or factored out of the

equation. Sadly, the debates and theories of evolution have focused
specifically upon the physical body as though it was a walking bag
of senseless biochemicals. Unfortunately, the unproven theory of
accidental evolution has become firmly fixed upon the mistaken
notion that life is simply a purposeless mixture of chemicals and
chaos.
Awareness and Survival
Accidental evolutionists have yet to explain how a batch of chemi-
cals can suddenly obtain a desire to survive. In order to desire to
survive, an organism must be aware, consciously or subconsciously,
that it is alive. A living organism must be able to differentiate itself
from a pool of dead chemicals somehow. If there is no distinction
of life then why avoid death?
Furthermore, why would a living organism desire to avoid becom-
ing nonliving chemistry without distinguishing between itself and
dead chemicals? Certainly, it would be easier to become dead
chemicals than to struggle for survival in the midst of the tremen-
dous environmental challenges.
A small organism who could be killed by direct sun exposure, for
example, would have gladly accepted death by the sun if death and
non-survival meant no further struggles to avoid the sun. If there
was no distinction between the living and dead chemicals, then the
path of least resistance for the living would be dead chemicals. As a
result, no living creature would bother to avoid death.
The Urge to Survive
If a conscious being could not distinguish itself from a nonliving
entity, there would be no urge to survive. Without the urge for sur-
vival, there would be no motivation to adapt. There would be no
reason to survive or evolve. It is like wondering why no boulders
were rolling up hills.
Without an incentive to survive, there is no urge or underlying ra-
tionale for doing the work to stay alive. Furthermore, without
7
an underlying motivation to remain alive, the concepts of the theory

of evolution such as ‘survival of the fittest’ are meaningless. The urge
to survive requires the living to distinguish themselves from the
nonliving. Without such distinction, life would have ceased already.
All of us would have preferred the easier path of dead chemicals.
Chemicals versus Self-awareness
Accidental evolution would require not only that living chemicals
somehow distinguishing themselves from dead chemicals, but also
chemicals desiring to lengthen the lives of their descendent chemi-
cal combinations. What mechanism gave living chemicals the impe-
tus to increase the chances of their descendents’ survival?
The implication of this is that not only will a batch of chemicals
struggle to survive and avoid death, but they will also adapt in ways
that won’t necessarily help them survive any better, but will help
their descendents. What gave these chemicals the ability to calculate
structural changes to improve the chances of survival for future
species?
Accidental evolutionists propose that through a desire to survive
and adapt to environmental challenges, an organism began altering
its anatomy for better survival. These alterations or mutations were
theoretically passed on to offspring. While it may seem speculatively
reasonable to consider as we see alteration in nature, there is still a
gaping hole: How did such a mechanism (of adapting and passing
genetic improvements to future generations) arise? What incentive
would lifeless chemicals have to create this unselfish mechanism for
their future generations? How and why could they have coded this
ability into their genetic mechanisms?
These questions bear the larger issue of why would a lifeless or pre-
viously lifeless bag of chemicals decide it was important that future
generations even exist, let alone improve their chances of survival.
While we might quickly assume that living organisms would want to
produce offspring with greater changes of survival, there is no ra-
tional reason for this desire. Why would a selfishly motivated newly
living organism care about a future generation?
8
First accidental evolutionists make a huge leap assuming that life

somehow spontaneously generated from chemicals. Then they
make a huge leap that these newly living chemicals somehow pre-
ferred survival and pain as opposed to a painless existence of
nonlife. Then they make another huge leap by assuming that these
newly living chemicals could and would want to dilute their strength
to produce offspring that require only trouble and work to main-
tain.
Then evolution theory proponents take the leap in assuming that
these newly living chemicals somehow created an “unselfish gene”
that somehow passed on improvements for the future survival of
future generations who do nothing for that newly living chemical
itself. All of this was done by newly living chemicals that not much
different in substance from their dead chemical cousins?
The only answer accidental evolutionists seem to give us to these
questions is that this all must have been a series of random acci-
dents. It should not have happened, but accidentally did, they claim.
This is seemingly accidental evolutionists’ only answer to all the real
puzzles of existence:
Accidental DNA Mutation
The assumption that accidental evolutionists seem to make is that
each required event, from the initial conversion of dead chemicals
to live chemicals to each genetic mechanism and every improbable
variation, took millions if not billions of years to occur. With this
much time at their disposal, all sorts of accidental variations could
possibly happen, they maintain.
They claim that from all the variations that did take place, the ones
that extended or improved life were retained because those varia-
tions made for better survival. The other accidental variations did
not work so well, so those species must have died off. All the one-
legged accidental variations did not survive. These types of varia-
tions fell to the wayside as these weaker creatures were killed off.
This part of the theory is called ‘survival of the fittest.’ Improved varia-
tions were supposedly selected through ‘natural selection.’
9
While these theories might resonate as we consider already devel-

oped species continuing to develop and adapt, the formations of
the original mechanisms as mentioned above are completely un-
grounded and illogical.
As we investigate DNA evidence, two inconsistencies become evi-
dent. On one hand, geneticists have determined that DNA muta-
tions occur at a very uniform rate. In other words, mutations take
place in a stepped fashion, with a consistent pattern.
At the same time, accidental evolutionists would like us to believe
that changes in species occurred randomly and spontaneously. So
we ask: How could a consistent and uniform pattern of change oc-
cur randomly and accidentally?
Fossil Records
Logically, if variations occur randomly, and only the better ones
survived, this implies that many thousands of variations other than the
one that survived should have occurred. If this took place then we
should see many fossil records of thousands if not millions of other
variations and species. Why are there so few fossil species of each
type if they all were accidentally forming all sorts of variations, from
which only a few eventually progressed?
Another problem that seems to plague the accidental evolution
theory is transitional species. If we consider that each major change
from one species to the next required – according to accidental
evolution theory – millions of years and many small variations to
accomplish, then we should see many fossils half-way or partially-
through the change from one species to the next. The step from
invertebrate fish to vertebral fish is an example. This step suppos-
edly took 100 million years to accomplish.
So where are all the partial-vertebrate fossils? Why didn’t any of
these transitional species survive? We should also be seeing transi-
tional species between every other species – not major leaps from
one to another.
10
Furthermore, many of these transitional species would not be so

inferior as to eliminate their survival. We should see half-long
necked giraffes. We should see zebras with only a couple of stripes,
then some with a few more, then some with many stripes. Where
are the occurrences of the myriad of transitional creatures that var-
ied but were not inferior in any survival context?
Instead of transitional species, the fossil record has shown a consis-
tent pattern: fully developed species appearing for a period of time
before becoming extinct. Analysis has shown that some 99% of all
species found in fossil records have become extinct altogether. Yet
in these records we find little evidence of these extinct species tran-
sitioning into the species we see around us today.
There are so many extraordinary features that different species have
that sets them drastically apart from other species. Animals with
complex brains provide a good example. While it is presumed that
the complex human brain was an evolutionary accident, it appears
that many species outside of the human evolutionary chain of apes
on down also have complex brains. While it is supposed that this
hereditary “abnormality” might have accidentally occurred once in
an accidental evolutionary cycle, to propose it occurred by accident
multiple times is illogical.
In the case of fossil finds, the assumption seemingly has been sim-
pler organism fossil finds have outdated more complex organism
fossil finds. Yet researchers continue to find complexity among
even the oldest of fossil finds.
In recent digs from the Australian outback and reported by Univer-
sity of California researchers Droser and Gehling in 2008, fossils of
Funisia dorothea, a type of tube worm dated at some 565 million years
ago showed a complexity among organisms far older than previ-
ously thought. It was assumed that at this point, organisms were
quite simple and asexual, contrasting to the sexual reproduction of
F. dorothea.
Dinosaurs are thought to have lived well over 200 million years ago
according to carbon dating, and their mass extinction is said to have
11
occurred about 65 million years ago. Outside of the water-borne

organisms more easily preserved and located, there is not much of a
fossil record either prior to the dinosaurs or after their mass extinc-
tion.
During this rather short period of 65 million years after the cata-
clysmic event that theoretically destroyed just about every signifi-
cant species of life, a new series of evolutionary steps would have
had to begin. This post-cataclysm evolutionary phase was necessary
to graduate microorganisms and possibly the few fish and horse-
shoe crabs remaining. This leaves the evolutionary process little
more than 60 million years to land on the human.
In the final analysis, most biologists and archeologists are disap-
pointed at the lack of fossil evidence proving a clear timeline of
evolution from simple to complex organisms. The physical evidence
simply does not indicate clear evidence for accidental evolution.
‘The Fittest’ have not always Survived.
One of the major assumptions of the ‘survival of the fittest’ concept is
that the strong variations with better chances of survival make it.
Why then, are there so many weak species around today? Why have
these not been stomped out by the stronger variations? Why was
the tender butterfly not taken out by the dragonfly? Why was the
black ant not eliminated by the fire ant? Why was the field mouse
not taken out by the cane rat?
Accidental evolutionists maintain that each surviving species has
special characteristics that somehow allowed it to survive. However,
there is no explanation given for obvious weaknesses appearing
within the surviving species. If ‘survival of the fittest’ was indeed the
case, through all this evolution we should be left with primarily a
few super-species: the less fit species should have been wiped out
by now.
The laughable part of these concepts is the current human condi-
tion. While the ‘survival of the fittest’ and natural selection elements of
the theory are supposed to improve successive species’ chances for
survival, the human form of life has “evolved” to the advanced
12
stage of not only endangering its own survival through the poison-
ing of the earth and atmosphere; but endangering the survival of
nearly every species on the planet. Could this be a new twist in the
evolutionary process, perhaps?
The fact is, we have a very stable number of species and varieties,
and they each have their arranged roles to play. There is a balance
between these various species. The balance is easily seen when hu-
mankind intrudes into the environment with clear-cutting of forests
and the like. While individual species are certainly adapting to
changes in their environment, these adaptations maintain the bal-
anced distinctions between species.
Outside of the drastic imbalances humans have introduced, the
subtle environmental changes and variations in nature are – like the
rest of the universe – precise, measurable and designed.
Limitations of Archeological Evidence
Because of a lack of substantial and certain findings, geologists and
archeologists have had to make far-reaching conclusions about our
origin. Fragile assumptions have been made using limited archeo-
logical evidence. This has resulted in a few new findings immedi-
ately and dramatically contracting previous assumptions. As a result,
debates rage over the interpretations of these few findings. The
major mistaken assumption has been that the fossils and bones
found to date in archeological digs truly represent the reality of our
past.
Finding a place to dig where there may be a preserved fossil or
bone fragment of any consequence is tremendous guesswork. As a
result, a dig will rarely unearth anything significant in terms of hu-
mankind’s origins. Frankly, this is because most of that history has
neatly decomposed into the earth. The rate of organic decomposi-
tion is extremely fast, and relies greatly upon where an organism
died and how.
With regard to humankind’s evolution, it also depends upon how
that culture buried their dead. It is the rare occasion that an ancient
skull or bone fragment will be preserved enough for reliable identi-
13
fication. The earth has had a volatile geological past. There are now
oceans where dry land was.
There are now deserts where large bodies of water were. There is
evidence of massive and widespread volcanic eruptions and floods
that covered huge regions around the world at one time or another.
Finding a few spots here and there to dig might give us brief
glimpses of a single individual’s or family’s situation. How reliable
are such findings? Are they reliable enough for scientists to make
bold statements regarding our origin?
How many gaps have archeologists had to fill with liberal assump-
tions and speculations about man’s ancestry? Perhaps the question
should focus on the inverse: How much real evidence do we actu-
ally have? How many old clearly identifiable bones have been
found? Of the few bones we have found, how reliable is the infor-
mation they provide?
Over the last hundred years, a variety of skulls and old sets of bones
have been found that indicate that humankind (hominids) has ex-
isted for millions of years. These have included findings of various
human-like skeletal remains, most or all of which stood and walked
on two feet (bipedalism). These include Ardipithecus ramidus, Austra-
lopithecus aethiopicus, Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus africanus,
Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus garhi, Australopithecus robus-
tus, Australopithecus boisei, Australopithecus sediba, Homo antecessor, Homo
erectus, Homo ergaster, Homo floresiensis, Homo georgicus, Homo habilis,
Homo heidelbergensis, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo sapiens, Kenyanthropus
platyops, and Sahelanthropus tchadensis. Nearly all of these species are
thought to be somehow linked to the evolution of modern day hu-
mans.
While bones are difficult to age using carbon dating, archeologists
have used a number of extrapolations to make their dating esti-
mates. These are a combination of 1) the species of surrounding
animal bones; 2) the soil content where the bones were found; 3)
rock and tree content existing within the layers of rock in nearby
vicinity; 4) any stone tools or other implements; and 5) the general
nature and condition of the bones; 6) the opinions of peers.
14
Sometimes, the archeologist will make rough estimates of age sim-

ply by looking at the surrounding evidence. Here is a statement of
dating given by Donald Johanson, who found bone fragments of
the famous “Lucy” fossil:
Though we had no confirmed dates yet from the rocks at Hadar, by comparing
other mammal fossils from Hadar, especially pig teeth, with those that had been
found at the Omo, Tom Gray and I suspected that the knee joint could be be-
tween 3 and 4 million years old.
[and later]
All the 1992 Hadar hominids are about 3 million years old; the oldest Hadar
hominids come from sediments that are 3.4 million years old. Add on the fossils
from Laetoli, a site in Tanzania, most of which date to 3.4 and 3.5 million
years ago, and you have a half million years of documented Australopithecus
afarensis evolution. Including the Middle Awash site south of Hadar, where
hominid fossils are 3.8 or 3.9 million years old, that adds up to almost a mil-
lion years with afarensis around, evolving very little, from what we could tell
after our first look at the new fossils. (Johanson 1994)
As mentioned above, there have been many other findings of bones
that have been identified as different species of hominids. More
recent finds, such as “Selam” by Zeresenay Alemseged and “Tou-
mai” by Michel Brunet have been aged at 4.4 million years and 6
million years old, respectively. These are now considered the oldest
bipedal hominid bones found.
But what do all these finds tell us overall? Should we assume that all
of these various species of hominids died off as humankind sur-
vived because humans were smarter and figured out how to sur-
vive? Then how did the human hominids get smarter?
The assumption that Darwin made was that when Africa dried out
and became plains, the apes had to get out of the trees and find
their food elsewhere. They had to start hunting and making tools in
order to survive. So they began to walk upright to move around
faster, began to make tools, reduced their canine teeth, and grew
larger brains all of a sudden?
15
The evidence found so far indicates otherwise. As mentioned earlier

regarding genetic evidence, mutations among apes and humans
today show a steady and consistent rate of DNA change. There is
no evidence for a sudden, radical change.
In fact, the finding of “Lucy” and “Salem” in areas assumed to be
two million years apart, yet were the same species, indicates there
was no evolutionary change among these hominids over a period of
several million years. This is also the point Donald Johanson makes
in the excerpt earlier. Other archeologists have agreed.
Climatologists studying core readings from oceans, mountains and
ancient lake beds from Africa are now theorizing that Africa’s cli-
mate stayed relatively stable between six million and two million
years ago. Then two million years ago, the climate began to radically
change, and lakes came and went, as arid climates alternated with
wet climates over periods of thousands of years.
Evolutionists are now theorizing that during this variable weather
period, these early hominids evolved into the bigger-brained hu-
mans. They started making their tools and adapting to the variable
climates.
The connection is made because Homo habilis, the “toolmaker” was
found to be about 1.7 million years old. He is the oldest hominid
found with a larger brain size (about 640 cc compared to the 300-
400 cc sizes of the few earlier hominids found). So it is assumed
now that climate change forced some hominid species to figure out
how to survive through more challenging circumstances, so they
developed bigger brains and got smarter.
Yes, this theory seems to fit the evidence as found so far. But up until
this new information, Darwin’s theory that the apes got out of the
trees also fit the evidence known at that time, and before these
other species were found. Does this mean that Darwin was right
until just recently? No. It means that Darwin was wrong. It means
that the human evolutionary theory was incorrect, because it lacked
all the evidence.
16
So what does this say about the current theory and evidence? Have
we now found all of the evidence? Archeologists admit that one of
the reasons Africa has been such a treasure-trove of remains is that
some of the continent’s tectonic plates have pushed up older rock
regions that had been covered by volcanic eruptions millions of
years ago.
Where does this leave the rest of the planet? We know that the rest
of the planet has changed quite violently as well – more violently
than Africa apparently. There have been eruptions and meteorites
that have plunged the earth into cataclysm, burying the remains of
those that walked the planet in any given region of the world. Even
the earth’s magnetic poles have shifted and reversed a number of
times over this period.
What this all says is that we have likely only picked up one grain of
sand on an entire beach of evidence with regard to our archeologi-
cal findings. How can we possibly trust the theories of human evo-
lution from the tiny fragments of bones that have been found over
the past few decades?
A blind man walked into a quiet concert hall before the start of a concert. As
he approached the stairs to the balcony, a young child approached him and po-
litely took the man’s hand, and guided the man up the stairs towards his seat.
The blind man thanked the child, and wondered why theatre was filled with
children that evening.
Surely making such a grand conclusion about our origins using a
limited amount of evidence could not be considered reliable. When
we consider the tremendous land-mass, water and ice changes that
have taken place over the age of this planet, and we consider the
various civilizations that may have lived in different places – on
mountains and other places now covered with water or volcanic
rock – the likelihood that we’ve missed entire civilizations of hu-
mans becomes a definite possibility.
We also have not considered the many cultures that may have cre-
mated their dead. Certainly many traditional cultures practice cre-
17
mation. Yet modern geologists seem to be present their data as if

these few bones are conclusive evidence of man’s history.
Why do accidental evolutionists seem so confident of their theories
with such a shortage of evidence? To this we bear witness to the
pressures of research funding, publication and peer-groupthink.
Accuracy of Radioactive Dating
The timelines afforded by the radioactive dating done from arche-
ology and paleontology findings appear to offer substantial scien-
tific evidence. This, however, is somewhat deceiving.
Now there is no question that many of the finds from these digs are
tens of thousands to millions of years old. And certainly there is
great accuracy in relation to not knowing how old something is.
Furthermore, there is no argument that relics that have been carbon
dated at thousands or millions of years old – are indeed thousands
or millions of years old.
What is being questioned here is the precision and certainty among
these dating systems. Radioactive dating is good, but it leaves uncer-
tainty regarding every species’ timelines as proposed.
To some degree, we could compare this to a house of cards. If the
foundation – in this case, the dating system being used – is weak,
then some of the very assumptions being made on the basis of
those dating systems must also be understood to have a corre-
sponding degree of uncertainty.
Radioactive dating of carbon-14 and other isotopes assume several
factors unknown to modern scientists. In the case of carbon-14;
when a cosmic ray enters our atmosphere, it will bombard atoms,
creating neutrons that will bombard nitrogen molecules. These ni-
trogen atoms then initiate carbon-14 production. Theoretically,
carbon-14 is consumed by trees and other living matter at a linear
rate.
Once that tree or other living organism dies, the carbon-14 will
decompose without new carbon-14s being added (because the or-
18
ganism died). This means that a researcher can measure the amount
of carbon-14 left in the dead matter, compare it to the amount of
carbon-14 in a living form of a similar species today, and determine
the age by extrapolating the theoretical half-life (how long it takes
for half of the molecules to degrade) of carbon-14.
We are not debating this method’s ability to determine that some-
thing is very old. However, there are a number of problems relating
to the method’s accuracy. First, we are assuming the same rate of
cosmic radiation is entering the atmosphere over the expanse of
time between that date and the date of measurement.
Variances in the sun’s emissions, the universe’s movements, and
other atmospheric changes we may not be aware of can all affect
the levels of cosmic rays bombarding organisms in our atmosphere.
Some records show that the earth’s magnetic fields have dramati-
cally decreased through the years, which would directly affect car-
bon-14 levels. Second, we are assuming the atmosphere has re-
mained constant, allowing the same amount of isotope creation.
For example, today’s living creatures will not be able to be dated
accurately in the future because fossil fuel burning and industrial
pollution has dramatically changed our atmosphere. As a result, the
amount of carbon-14s in today’s atmosphere will not match the
atmosphere even a hundred years ago. This should also mean that
volcanic activity, floods, and other general atmospheric changes,
which we have seen evidence of, could also significantly impact the
rate of carbon-14 decay.
These types of events can all dramatically affect the atmospheric
balance, which can significantly change the rate of bombardment.
Third, many researchers are assuming that living creatures of the
past consumed carbon at the same levels they do today.
Carbon consumption rates vary greatly from species to species.
Nutritional requirements adjust to size, age, environment, sun expo-
sure, and food availability. Breathing rates change with atmospheric
conditions. Certainly, the assumption that over hundreds of thou-
19
sands of years, consumption rates will not vary with environmental

conditions change is a stretch.
Yet another assumption being made about carbon dating accuracy
is that carbon-14 decomposition rates are predictable in every oc-
currence. Physicists propose that carbon-14 deterioration is not
subject to the effects of the outside environment.
Despite this confidence, the rate of decomposition of many sub-
stances – their half-life – is still a theoretical model based upon ex-
tending a small sampling of decomposition for a short period into
much larger time periods. Quite simply, no one has been able to
accurately test the accuracy of the half-life period because radiocar-
bon testing was only developed in 1949 – by Willard Libby.
Because of the precision that nature was designed with, such a
clockworks system of isotope decomposition can be a useful measur-
ing device, as long as it is used with humility and practicality. Cur-
rently these methods are highly theoretical, as we do not fully un-
derstand all of the variables. Therefore, their reliability has
limitations.
Modern scientists have done tests by ring-dating trees to confirm
that carbon dating has, at least in the short range (1000-5000 years)
the ability to get in the ballpark. Comparison tests with Bristlecone
pine trees about 4000 years old (dated through ring dating, which is
also not conclusive because during some periods trees do not leave
rings) have shown carbon-14 dates could be from 600-700 years
short. Though modern scientists call this a confirmation of accu-
racy, it does show a 17.5% discrepancy. What will the discrepancy
be as older objects are dated?
Assuming accuracy levels within 80% at under 5,000 years, how can
we reliably count on dating extending to millions of years or more?
Assuming this variance would remain constant as the age increased
would also be foolhardy. The number of variants as mentioned
above – cosmic ray levels, atmospheric levels, consumption rates
and decomposition rates – all increase the possibility for error as the
age increases.
20
Assuming the 20% variance at 5,000 years, would 50% at 50,000 be

out of the question? This would make something dated at 50,000
years be 100,000 years old, or even 25,000 years old if the variance
went the other way. Consider the effect of this sort of variance on a
timeline of 200,000 years or more. The bottom line is that science is
making vast timeline and origin assumptions based on this dating
system.
When radioactive dating is extended into other isotopes like argon-
40, lead-206/-207, and strontium-87, many of carbon-14’s uncer-
tainties are compounded by new ones. As a result, different dating
systems often conflict when they are compared to each other in
dating the same objects.
Typically, geologists analyzing digs are confounded with radically
different dates using the different dating systems. We illustrate this
with the 70,000 year adjustment in bone remain aging mentioned
earlier.
As a result of inconsistent findings among carbon-dating, archeolo-
gists often do not use the isotope dating alone to determine the
date. As mentioned earlier, they will consider the surrounding envi-
ronment. They might consider the tools and pottery found on the
site. At the end of the day, these researchers will generally blend in
the isotope dating with the accepted timeline acceptable to their
peers. After all, this is what modern science is founded upon: Peer-
reviewed hypothesis.
Again, there is no argument that hominid bone fragments are very
old. We are not assuming that creation took place 5,000 years ago.
The point is that the evolution theories that modern scientists are
making are utilizing a lot of assumptions with relatively limited evi-
dence.
Yes, if you compare the evidence we have to having no evidence, there
seems to be some evidence. But when you compare the amount of
evidence we have with the amount of information we still do not have,
then we have a problem. It would be like making an assumption
about the ocean using a teaspoon of water.
21
Mutated Complexity within a Random System?

One of the assumptions of the accidental evolutionary theory is that
extremely simple organisms randomly developed into organisms of
incredible complexity. As the theory has undergone modern ad-
justment, the translation is that these species DNA have mutated in
such a way as to allow greater and greater complexity among their
metabolism, nervous system, digestive system and so on.
Now we are not talking about a couple of mutations here and there.
We are talking about trillions of mutations, all of which resulted in a
more complex and improved version.
The contradictory portion of this is that randomness requires the
acceptance of the chaos theory – the assumption that there is no
order within the universe. The problem arises because within a
condition of chaos, random events tend to lead to less order rather
than more order.
More complexity requires more order. Why? Because a more com-
plex system requires a higher level of arrangement among the mole-
cules that are existing within that system. For example, the human
body is exponentially more complex than a single-celled organism.
The human body contains trillions of cells, while a single-celled
organism has, well, a single cell. So the human body requires an
exponentially greater degree of order because there are so many
more components to organize within the human body.
Now because the assumption is that these supposedly random
DNA mutations led to exponentially greater complexity, this abso-
lutely contradicts the notion that this took place within a state of
chaos.
And since these mutations could not have occurred within a state of
chaos, this contradicts the notion that the mutations could have
randomly occurred.
Let’s use an example that has been offered as an argument by some,
and argued against by accidental evolutions. The question posed to
accidental evolutionists is how gradual mutations could have turned
22
a seemingly random part of a single cell organism’s uniform cell

membrane into an incredibly complex anatomical part such as the
eye.
Now the eye is an incredible instrument. It resembles an advanced
camera. It has a shutter; a lens; delicate cells that convert light into
data; and the ability to constantly keep the lens clear from block-
ages. All of this is dictated by millions of organized cells that act in a
super-coordinated manner to allow for vision.
Accidental evolutionists will respond that it would be easy to imag-
ine primitive creatures producing light-sensitive cells, which gradu-
ally over billions of years, develop into the complex eyes we have
today. So it is assumed they hold the logic in the argument.
Yes, they proclaim, there was just enough time for all these devel-
opments. Just enough time for accidental developments? What about the
time for a lack of development, or no development or reverse de-
velopment – all of which are just as likely within a random scenario.
We must remember that we are not just talking about gradually
improving just one eye. At the same time, we are talking about every
complexity existing within the entire body. The eye is only one component
among millions of other components among trillions of cells. We
are talking about the liver, the heart, the lungs, the genitals, the
nervous system, the brain, and the intestines. Every physiological
mechanism of our bodies has tremendous complexity and synchro-
nicity of composition.
Furthermore, all of these specialized organs and tissue systems con-
sist of many layers of networks traveling through each of them,
including neural, circulatory, lymphatic, biochemical, and more. All
of these layers work simultaneously and within biorhythms tuned
not only to each other, but tuned into the larger rhythms of the
universe. Human beings with advanced technologies have worked
for many years trying to purposely recreate only a few of the func-
tioning parts of the body. And we are saying that all of these com-
plexities accidentally developed?
23
More importantly, are we saying that all these complexities acciden-

tally developed among all the biomolecular structures on an interac-
tive basis to simultaneously develop into complex systems? In other
words, the complex eye could not have developed independently of
a complex nervous system to transmit its reception, or a complex
brain to receive those impulses.
In a state of chaos, where things occur randomly, changes are not
typically interactive. They are not organized. They are not collabora-
tive. Yet these are the types of changes that have taken place among
the species.
Each species displays a degree of unique complexity among its
body. And the complexity is also interactive, within each tissue sys-
tem, within families of any particular species and within the species
themselves. These notions run completely counter to random
changes within a chaotic system.
Accidental Biological Functionality?
Now let’s examine the specific faults in the notion of accidental
mutations producing organisms of greater complexity.
Accidental evolutionists suggest that it took the supposedly first
single-celled creature possibly trillions of generations to accidentally
develop into multicellular creatures: This is just this one simple mu-
tation. How about the rest of the mutations necessary to get the
single cell to the human? Apparently, the assumption is that each
progressive improvement took place in a stepped fashion.
Can cellular systems proceed with stepped progress? In other
words, will complex organ systems make individual partial changes
in tiny steps, accumulating these improvements at some point into
the grandest of complex behavior? Since cellular systems work on
an integrated basis, we must assume any change would have to have
occurred collaboratively, as mentioned above. Did all these changes
collaboratively happen accidentally? Which mutations took place
first?
24
Did the complex nervous system develop before the complex eye
did? Or perhaps the complex eye developed before the complex
nervous system. This would make that complex eye a lazy eye for a
few million years, while the nervous system caught up.
A basic contradiction exists between collaborative cellular behavior
and eventually-drastic changes in organ and tissue behavior. If we
consider the various functional complexities of advanced organ-
isms, while stepped mutation from one behavior to another could
not be functional during transition phases, individual components
could not change separately because they are each interacting with
other components for overall functionality.
This might be compared to one man building the Empire State
Building by forming each brick out of clay, then putting one brick up
at a time. If it took the man five minutes to make each brick one at
a time, mix the mortar and then put it in place, it would take this
bricklayer 400 years to lay all the bricks in the building, assuming a
forty-hour work-week.
Now consider how long it would take if we could only have one
man form and put up each brick, make the mortar, but a new, un-
trained man had to come in to make the mortar and put up each
next brick.
Each man would not know what a brick was, how to form one,
how to make the mortar, nor where or how to lay the brick even if
they figured out how to make one. Each new bricklayer would have
to learn from scratch, with no teaching from the previous brick-
layer. How long would this building take to build?
Most would conclude that if each man did not know how to lay
each brick, the building simply would never get built. If it did, it
would certainly collapse through a lack of planning, coordination
and exchange of knowledge between bricklayers.
What accidental evolutionists propose is similar to the later case:
They propose that dumb chemistry accidentally kept building complex
physiological organisms one layer at a time. Somehow, through
25
sheer luck, these dumb chemicals ended up building the complex

multi-cellular organisms around today.
Without purposeful design, planning and collaboration we are left with scattered,
disjointed, and faulty construction.
In the case of such a building, how could such a huge building be
built without a good design and knowledgeable builders?
Consider if, as current accidental evolutionist thinking goes, just
one favorable accidental mutation could take between a million and
a billion years to take hold among a species. This is only one mutation.
The number of mutations it would take to get the amoeba to a hu-
man body is currently unknown but trillions of mutations would not
be outrageous.
Using some genetic scientists’ calculations, consider the likelihood
of only one accidental favorable mutation occurring:
One chance in
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
This is one progressive mutation. Among organisms, trillions of such
single variations would have had to occur in order to accidentally
create just a few progressive complex improvements. Consider that
with each progressive mutation, the complexity of the creature in-
creases by only one small variation. This would be like saying that
26
each single bricklayer not only didn’t know how to make or lay a
brick, but the chances of them actually getting one brick in place was
one chance in 103000.
Could such a building ever get built with these incredible odds
against it? As you stack each progressive mutation necessary upon
the other, the time required simply does not compute to any logical
time frame – certainly not within the speculated age of the earth.
Nor does it fit within the range given by the fossil dates of various
species or the suspected age of the earth.
This point has also been debated by a number of well-known acci-
dental evolutionists. Some have proposed the solution of the directed
panspermia theory as discussed earlier. Again, this theory suggests that
life on earth was seeded from a distant planet because not enough
time was available. This of course bears the question of which
planet that was, and how did life develop on that planet.
In reality, accidental evolutionists do not know how long these sup-
posedly accidental mutations might have taken. They do not know
how long improvements developing into complex organs might
take. No one has yet to see a fish mutate to a mammal. This means
quite simply that they are guessing.
Accidental Genes
At the bare minimum, accidental evolutionists seem to be asking us
to believe simple chemicals somehow had the ability to develop into
increasingly complex life forms accidentally. Accidental evolution-
ists ask us to believe that a string of nucleotides along a phosphate-
sugar helix (DNA) has the ability to keep accidentally rearranging
progressively, without any ultimate purpose. This also implies that
trillions upon trillions of rearrangements happened, and only a few
allowed survival.
As we have seen with destructive viruses and other dangerous mu-
tations like cancer, just one misplaced nucleotide could result in a
deadly mutation which could easily wipe out an entire population –
or all life on earth many times over. The question arises: With these
27
kinds of odds (one chance in 103000 ) why would living organisms

still exist?
With such a low probability of progressive mutation, the inverse
results in a high probability of destructive mutation. How could
accidental life have survived through all those more probable de-
structive mutations? There is simply no logic for continued accidental
progressive mutation. It is a virtual impossibility and improbability.
With so many accidental mutations possible and so many billions of
accidental mutations supposedly taking place, a scorched-earth sce-
nario should have squelched life long ago.
This assumption has been argued against, and seemingly proven
wrong. An experiment designed by David Bartel and Jack Szostak,
and published in the journal Science in 1993, tested this assumption.
They wanted to see if a random group of molecules could become
defined through a synthesis of RNA molecules using catalases.
So they produced different RNA molecules from amino acids, each
with about 300 nucleotides long. The nucleotides were assumed to
have random nucleotide sequences--which hold the amino acids
together to create sequences of amino acids.
Within these supposedly random RNA groups, they threw in ri-
bozymes--with catalyze RNA. They then watched the sequencing of
ongoing phases of chemical reactions caused by these catalases, and
found that over several rounds, the RNA sequencing became more
organized, and selective. Their reactions sped up and with ongoing
rounds, the RNA sequencing evolved to become more specific.
The experiment supposedly showed that in an isolated, random
environment, RNA can utilize catalases to randomly become more
and more organized.
The problem, however, with this experiment is that that environ-
ment they set up was not random. Since they set up the environ-
ment, it could not have been random. They added particular amino
acids, certain RNA catalases, and put them into an environment
conducive for producing greater organization. This is precisely what
a living system does! While the lab environment was seemingly ran-
28
dom, because these living scientists set up the fundamentals for life,
within an environment conducive to life, the evolving of the RNA
sequences took place as a result of living organisms: the scientists
who put it all together.
Let's say that a coach said, "hey I'm going to test whether or not
kids would randomly organize into two teams if I put them out into
a field, divided them into two groups, and gave one group red col-
ored shirts and the other group green colored shirts."
So if the kids, who are already programmed to play games and form
teams, noticed that one group had different shirts, and formed
teams to play a game they chose this shows that kids randomly or-
ganize themselves into teams? No. Because the coach gave them the
shirts, and put them out into the field, they were already likely to
begin playing games. And once they noticed the difference in shirts,
they were apt to divide into the teams – all dictated by the scenario
established by the coach.
Obviously, once Bartel and Szostak put together (organized) the
environment and the ingredients conducive to evolution there
would certainly be evidence for evolution. Why?
Because living organisms and all their components are already pro-
grammed for evolution. Putting RNA catalases together with RNA
complete with nucleotides and amino acids together within an envi-
ronment was precisely the same function that a living organism will
conduct. Once there is some organization set up by living organ-
isms, there is evolution, because that is the nature of consciousness.
Is Love an Accident?
The ‘survival of the fittest’ and ‘natural selection’ theories do not explain
the various complexities of families. If a chemical machine was in-
tent to simply survive, why consider ones future descendents? Why
consider the health and survival of offspring? Future descendents
will not increase an individual’s personal survival chances. Having
and protecting offspring is simply a burden, slowing down ones
chances of personal longevity.
29
While we might consider the possibility that stronger offspring

might one day protect the parents, this requires a complex outlook
into the future that includes the assumption that the offspring will
stick around. The accidental evolution theory is quite vague on this
subject.
Most accidental evolutionists will mumble that some strange acci-
dental genetic mutation created an instinct within physical organ-
isms to promote the survival of their own clan. If one asks where
this instinct came from, more mumbling about random accidental
genetic mutations will probably result. This is because accidental
evolutionists do not know where instinct comes from.
Let us examine the ‘survival of the fittest’ doctrine a little closer with
respect to practical life on our planet. Humans throughout history
have sacrificed their survival on behalf of their mates, their family,
their country, or their relationship with the Supreme Person. Others
may risk their lives for the sake of achieving respect and love from
others.
Consider a mountain climber who risks his life to get to the top,
thereby gaining the respect of others. Animals also make similar
sacrifices. They are often seen defending family or fighting to in-
crease their pecking order and the respect of peers.
How would these types of behaviors translate to the ‘survival of the
fittest’ theory? Love and sacrifice would seemingly have to be con-
sidered errors of evolution. Loving another or sacrificing oneself
for another would require a feeling that others are more important
than ones own survival.
Risking ones life for the love or respect of others means that gain-
ing love and respect are more important than survival. This con-
flicts with the assumption that creatures have evolved through mo-
tives of pure self-preservation. In other words, have these humans
and animals who act out of care for one another become genetically
crazy?
Are those who value family, love, honesty, beauty, humility, grati-
tude, and sincerity above their own lives just irrational mutants?
30
Accidental evolutionists seem to be saying that an accidental family

gene somehow developed, connecting ones family’s survival to the
survival of the species. This would seem to be quite the intricate
accidental gene mutation – but it does not explain the more com-
plex activities related to love and sacrifice.
The ‘survival of the fittest’ theory assumes living organisms are essen-
tially self-centered, self-motivated chemical machines. Love and
sacrifice confounds this theory, because ‘survival of the fittest’ should
result in only cruel, selfish actions. In the true ‘survival of the fittest’
world, activities of love and sacrifice simply would not exist.
This is because the conscious being is by nature not a selfish crea-
ture. Though we display quite a bit of selfishness within this dimen-
sion, caring for ones family and sacrificing for noble concerns re-
flects that conscious beings are loving creatures by nature. It reflects
that living organisms are simply not chemical machines.
If we are not chemical machines, then doesn’t that mean that the
evolution of species could not be a chemical process?
Accidental Evolution Contradicts Life
The primary rationale for the accidental evolution theory has always
been observations noting the similarities between various species.
As one examines the physical body of each species, it is not hard to
notice what motivated the widespread acceptance of this speculative
theory.
This simple observation, without a better explanation, seems out-
wardly logical. That is until the complexities are examined as we do
here. It is one thing to notice that creatures can change and adapt
their physical forms in response to environmental stress. It is wholly
another to concoct a speculative theory where one small original
creature accidentally evolved into the diverse complex of creatures
we see today.
Certainly a living organism can make physical adaptations to their
environment and carry on those adaptations to successive genera-
31
tions. We do not debate this. However, an organism will only make

changes within a narrow bandwidth and under certain guidelines.
As a result, we see various environmental controls regulating the
various species populations: We see predators keeping populations
in control, illustrating just one of the governing systems among
organisms.
The central failing of the accidental evolutionist theory is that it
does not distinguish between life and matter. It cannot explain
where life came from. It is not able to explain consciousness; the
recognition of life; a living organism’s will to survive; nor an organ-
ism’s tendency to treasure love more than survival. Furthermore,
the accidental evolution theory is full of gaping holes: A lack of
evidence exists for transitional species, deceased variations, sponta-
neous generation, accidental DNA or RNA creation, and random
mutations.
These shortcomings of the theory have made it subject to a variety
of fixes over the years. This is because the accidental evolution the-
ory was and still is simply an imaginative, speculative guess, based
on a thin set of observations, patched together with allegory and
supposition. The accidental evolution theory creates more questions
than it solves, leading to side-theories and continued controversy.
The central question is: Why do the various species appear so simi-
lar? Could there be any other explanation for the similarities be-
tween different species?
What if there was a better explanation? And what if this explanation
also explained all of the other problems currently resident in the
accidental evolution theory?
What if this also explained the individuality, spirituality, love and the
quest for fulfillment and survival among species?
32
Chapter Two
Who Evolves?
The essential first step in understanding real evolution is knowing
just WHO or WHAT is evolving. This brings us to the core essence
of life and the living: What is life and what is a living organism?
What is a Living Organism?
This is the big question. Surrounding us are living organisms with
the will to survive, moving about in such a way as to eat sufficiently,
procreate, defend themselves, and be as comfortable as they can.
What is driving this?
Currently, there are several prevailing theories about the driving
forces involved amongst living organisms.
Several centuries ago, many thought that the heart was the essential
component of life. The heart pumps the blood through the veins,
and blood was seen as the critical component for life.
In fact, many have just assumed over the ages, that the physical
body – the body parts – conjunctively compose life.
As scientists gradually discovered the nature cells, many proposed
that because the cells in the body seem to drive all the functions of
the body, the cells must be the essential component of life. They
saw the mitochondria producing energy, and the cell nucleus pro-
ducing the enzymes and hormones that drive the body’s processes.
Another theory says that the driving force is the chemicals that re-
cycle through the body. These chemicals, such as neurotransmitters
and hormones, drive many processes within the body, so perhaps
this is the core essence of life.
Others have proposed that the grey matter of the brain is the es-
sence of life. Because doctors have observed memory impulses lo-
cated at particular parts of the brain, some proposed that the brain
must contain the essence of life.
Yet another theory says that the core essence must be the electrical
activity within the brain and central nervous system. As researchers
33
have tracked down motion, emotion, pain and other responses, they
find that the brain and CNS seem to be at the root of these func-
tions.
Others have proposed that the essential component of life is DNA.
These proteins, because they contain the genetic material and pro-
gramming of so many functions, are seen as the center for distin-
guishing one living organism from another.
As we can see, each of these theories have had scientific credence,
because scientists observed that the living energy seems to drive the
activity of that particular part of a living organism.
However, we can also prove that each of these components do not
actually contain life. Rather, they are merely reflecting life.
Let’s look at each of these individually, using our own bodies for
observation.
Heart Transplants and Amputation
Several decades, the first heart transplant was made. What hap-
pened? Did the life of one person go into the body of another? Did
the person with the new heart change?
This of course has been the subject of some interesting movies, but
in reality, the heart transplant patient experiences no change. They
are the same person. Despite getting the heart from another body,
and despite their old heart being tossed in the dumpster, they are
the same person.
This should confirm that the essence of life – the living person –
does not come from the heart.
The same goes for amputation. Following an amputation due to an
infection or other injury, no one would claim the amputee is any
less of a person. This is because the same personality is there de-
spite a massive structural change in the body. This logic can be ex-
tended to even severe cases such as the loss of both arms and legs
or other major parts of the anatomy.
34
An explosion or other traumatic accident might leave ones torso

intact while amputating both the body’s arms and legs. Regardless
of losing these appendages, the person is still perceived as a whole
person – the same person as before – even though their body can-
not function the way it did before. The person who operates the
body still contains the same conscious being with the same person-
ality.
This is why paraplegic and quadriplegic rights are protected by law;
and why Dr. Steven Hawking, a quadriplegic, is considered one of
the today’s foremost theoretical physicists despite his physical
handicaps. He is regarded as no less of a person than the rest of us.
Physically disabled people are given equal rights because society
considers these persons equal in all respects, despite deficiencies in
their physical bodies.
All of the physical body parts illustrate the same logic. It is now
commonplace in medicine to surgically remove and replace organs
such as kidneys, livers, hearts, hips and other parts in order to pre-
serve the healthy functioning of the body. Some parts – like hearts
and hip sockets – are now replaced with artificial versions. Modern
medicine has illustrated through many years of organ transplants
that a person’s identity does not travel with the organ.
Otherwise, we might have – as a few comedic theatrical perform-
ances have suggested – people whose personalities reflect their or-
gan donors. Imagine what would happen if someone receiving a
heart transplant assumed part of the personality of the dead donor.
We’d truly have a mess on our hands.
This situation is analogous to an auto accident: A car is involved in
an accident and brought to an auto mechanic. The mechanic deter-
mines that the car needs a new set of tires, a new set of bumpers
put on, and the engine rebuilt before the car can be put back on the
road. The driver waits for the repairs to be completed, and then
gets back in the car and drives it away. The new car parts do not
affect the driver.
35
Brain Damage
One might propose that since we have yet to transplant someone’s
brain maybe we are the brain. Most of us have heard of the famous
neurosurgical experiments first documented by Dr. Wilder Penfield,
where he stimulated the temporal cortex and stimulated particular
memories during brain surgery. These results and their confirma-
tions left scientists with an impression that life must reside in the
brain since emotional memories were stimulated with the electrode
testing.
This assumption is disputed by other brain research over the past
fifty years on both humans and animals, however. The assumption
that the emotional self is contained in the brain has been conflicted
by the many cases of emotions and memory following the removal
of brain parts and even a majority of the brain. Mishkin (1978)
documented that the removal of either the amygdala or the hippo-
campus did not severely impair memory. Mumby et al. (1992) de-
termined that memory was only mildly affected in rats with hippo-
campus and amygdala lesions. According to a substantial review
done by Vargha-Khadem and Polkey (1992), numerous hemidecor-
tication surgeries – the removal of half the brain – had been con-
ducted for a number of disorders.
In a majority of these cases, cognition and brain function continued
uninterrupted. A few cases even documented an improvement in
cognition. Additionally, in numerous cases of intractable seizures,
where substantial parts of brain have been damaged, substantial
cognitive recovery resulted in 80 to 90% of the cases.
These and numerous other studies illustrate this effect – called neu-
roplasticity. In other words, the inner self is not reduced by brain
damage or removal. The same person remains after brain parts are
removed. The same personality remains. Many retain all their
memories.
The majority of brain-damaged stroke patients go about living nor-
mal lives afterward as well. Even in cases where memory, cognitive
and/or motor skills are affected by cerebrovascular stroke, the per-
36
son within is still present. Though handicapped, the person remains

unaffected by the brain damage.
Memory, sensory perception and the emotional self-concept are not
brain-dependent. Many organisms have memory and sensory per-
ception without having a brain.
Bacteria, for example, do not have brains, yet they can memorize a
wide variety of skills and events, including what damaged or helped
them in the past. Other organisms such as plants, nematodes and
others maintain memory and recall without having brains or even
central nervous systems.
MRI and CT brain scans on patients following brain injuries or
strokes have shown that particular functions will often move from
one part of the brain to another after the functioning area was dam-
aged. We must therefore ask: Who or what is it that moves these
physical functions from one part of the brain to another? Is the
damaged brain area making this decision? That would not make
sense. Some other guiding function must be orchestrating this move
of the function. What or who is guiding this process?
The retention of memory, emotion, and the moving of brain func-
tion from one part of the brain to another is more evidence of a
deeper mechanism; an operator or driver within the body who is utiliz-
ing the brain – rather than being the brain. The driver is the continu-
ing element. Physical structures continually undergo change, while
the driver remains, adapting to those changes.
The Recycling of Cells
Throughout its physical lifetime, our body is continually changing,
yet we continue to maintain our core identity and consciousness.
Research has shown all living cells in the body have a finite lifespan,
ranging from minutes to days to years. A few cells – such as certain
bone marrow stem cells and brain cells – may exist through the
duration of the body.
There are only a handful of these cells compared to the estimated
200 trillion cells making up the body, however. By far the vast ma-
37
jority of cells in the body will participate in cell division. Following

division, older cells time out.
They are broken down by the immune system and discarded, leav-
ing the newly divided cells in their place. Using this process the
body constantly sloughs off older cells from the body, replacing
them with new ones. Different cells in different parts of the body
have different life spans. For example:
-Gastric cells are replaced about every five minutes;
-Stomach lining cells are replaced within a week;
-Skin cells are replaced within about 90 days;
-The entire liver is regenerated within two months;
-The bone cells will all be replaced within a year.
While nerve cells and stem cells can live longer – for years – the
composition of every cell, including all nerve and stem cells, under-
goes an even faster turnover. Every cell in the body is made up of
ionic and molecular combinations. These molecular combinations
make up a cell’s DNA, RNA, cytoplasm, organelles, and membrane.
These atomic and molecular sub-units are constantly being replaced.
New molecular matter enters the body from the environment. Old
molecular matter is expelled through waste and respiration. Proc-
esses of cell membrane diffusion, osmosis and ionic channel con-
veyance allow each living cell to undergo a constant recycling of
atomic elements.
Active cells will replace molecules and ions quite rapidly. Brain cells
will recycle all their atoms and molecules within three days. Ninety-
eight percent of all the atoms and molecules in the body are re-
placed within a year, and most biologists agree all the atoms and
molecules within the body are replaced by new ones within five
years.
Understanding that our physical bodies change nearly every cell
within days, weeks or years; and all our body’s atoms and molecules
are being replaced from the food we eat, the water we drink and the
38
air we breathe, we can accurately make the following statement: The

body we are wearing today is not the same body we were wearing five years ago.
We are now wearing a completely recycled body. In effect, we have
each changed bodies. Every rhythmic element of matter – every vibrat-
ing atom – is different.
This might well be compared to a waterfall. The water within a wa-
terfall is always changing. From moment to moment, the waterfall
will be made up of different water. Therefore, the waterfall we see
today is not the same waterfall we saw yesterday.
Since each of us is the same person from moment to moment and
year to year within an ever-changing body, logically we each have an
identity separate from this temporary vehicle.
We cannot be the body, since the body has been replaced while we
are still here. Should we look at our photograph taken five years
ago, we will be looking at a completely different body from the one we
are wearing today. The very eyes looking at the eyes in the picture
are different.
Body Biochemicals
Over recent years, various researchers have proposed from one
basis or another that our identities are chemical. They have pro-
posed that emotions and personality are seated within the chemicals
(such as hormones and neurotransmitters) that flow through the
bloodstream, basal cell network and the synapses of our nervous
systems. Could our identities simply be a mixture of complex
chemicals? A logical review of the scientific evidence would indicate
otherwise.
Emotional responses to environmental stimuli will initiate any
number of biochemical cascade pathways to occur within the body.
A cascade occurs when one chemical release stimulates the release
of another biochemical, and that biochemical in turn stimulates the
release of another. The biochemicals in the cascade might stimulate
a particular cell, tissue or organ function. With each cascade, there
39
are initiating stimuli and subsequent responses from various tissues

and nerves.
Because neurologists and other researchers have seen these bio-
chemicals involved with emotional response, some have proposed
that these biochemicals contain the emotion. They propose that
chemicals such as endorphins, dopamine, serotonin, epinephrine, or
acetylcholine each contain the particular emotions they reflect, and
are thus the sources of the emotion.
They propose that these signaling biochemicals connect with recep-
tors positioned at the surface of the cell; and the response by the
cell is the emotion being released from the chemical.
An example some have used is the famed opiate receptor, linked
with the cell’s reception of morphine or endorphins, and the sensa-
tion of euphoria. The idea is that the feeling of euphoria is pro-
duced when the ligands like endorphin connect with the receptor.
One problem with this speculation is that no two organisms re-
spond identically to the same chemical. With opiates for example,
some may hallucinate while others may only respond casually. On
the other hand, some may have nightmarish experiences. If these
structurally identical neurochemicals contained the emotion, why
would each person respond differently to the same chemical and
dose?
Another major problem with this thesis is the observer: Who is
observing that the body is feeling euphoria? Who observes the hal-
lucinations created by certain chemicals? Who observes the positive
or negative sensations of the body? The fact is, without an observer,
there is no way to be able to view feelings. A physical body that is
experiencing a physical emotional response with no observer could
not observe and review the experience.
Therefore, there could be no discretion regarding the event. There
could be no judgment available as to whether the experience was
positive or negative. There could be no available decision on
whether the experience should be repeated or curtailed. There could
40
be no analysis or learning experience from our activities. These re-

quire an observer of the experience.
The perception of pain may offer some clarity. In 2005, Dr. Ronald
Melzack, co-author of the now-standard 1965 gate control theory of
pain transmission, updated his theory of pain from a simple gateway
effect to one of a multidimensional experience of neurosignatures.
His new theory – which he calls the body-self neuromatrix – ex-
plains that the consensus of clinical research over thon acute pain,
behavior and chronic pain indicates an independent perceptual state
of self; observing and exchanging feedback and response with the
locations of injury.
Because doctors and researchers have found a good portion of the
pain response is unrelated to specific injury but rather a modifica-
tion of sensory experience, this neuromatrix indicates that pain re-
quires an interaction between the nervous system and what Melzack
calls the “self.”
In other words, pain requires two components: 1) The sensory
transmission of pain and 2) the observer or experiencer of that pain.
Once that pain is experienced, there may also be a feedback re-
sponse from the experiencer. This feedback may either be: 1) take
action to remove the cause of the pain; or 2) if there is no apparent
cause then become extra-sensitive to the pain until the cause is de-
termined (Baranauskas and Nistri 1998). This increased sensory
elevation leads to what is called nociceptic pain – pain not appear-
ing to have a direct physical cause. Some might also refer to this
type of pain as being psychosomatic, although psychosomatic pain
is often considered not real. Noiceptive pain is considered real, but
its cause is not obviously physically apparent.
Regardless of the name, this type of pain is very difficult to under-
stand and manage. This is especially true for doctors and patients
who deal with chronic pain that appears unrelated to trauma or
inflammation. Because the self naturally seeks pleasure, we would
propose that the current cause of that pain is always real, from ei-
ther a gross physical level or a more subtle level.
41
Regardless of the level, the self experiencing the pain would cer-
tainly be considered separate from the pain, along with any bio-
chemical messengers assisting in its transmission. After all, how
could the self “escape” pain unless it was separate from the cause of
the pain? Because they increase the separation of the self from the
pain source, pain medications are a multi-billion dollar business.
Since the biochemical transmission effectors such as substance P
among neurons are present during pain responses, it is logical that
these chemicals have a role in the physical responses to emotions or
memories. However, the proposal made by scientists such as Can-
dace Pert, Ph.D. that emotions exist within the chemicals is not
supported by logic or observation.
Researchers have observed an increase in biochemicals like dopa-
mine, serotonin, and various endorphins in the bloodstream during
feelings of love or compassion. The question being raised is
whether the emotions stimulated the biochemicals or the biochemi-
cals stimulated the emotions.
The implications of proposing the limited view that the emotion
was created by the biochemicals are many. This would be equivalent
to saying love comes from biochemicals. It would open the door to
a murder suspect pleading that his body’s chemical balance was
responsible for his committing the fatal crime.
Dopamine, serotonin and endorphins are circulating at heightened
levels following activities such as laughing eating, sex and post-
traumatic stress. These biochemicals are also circulating at other
times, during other emotions, albeit at different levels. What comes
first, the biochemical or the emotion? Does the emotion drive the
biochemical levels or do the biochemicals drive the emotional re-
sponse? To break this down properly, we must separate the physio-
logical response to an optional response relating to optional behav-
ior and decision-making.
Yes, a biochemical reaction or ligand-receptor response can stimu-
late a physiological response. But can it dictate behavior? Could a
hormone or neurotransmitter ligand-receptor response force us to
42
shoplift? In that case, we should be able to find that certain bio-

chemicals were “shoplifting” chemicals. We’d be able to just reduce
their levels and forget about putting shoplifters in jail. We’d also
have to look at blood donors’ criminal records before accepting
their blood.
The reason we put shoplifters in jail is to teach them that shoplift-
ing is morally wrong. This is decision for an observer – an inner self
– who can observe the body’s activities. Each of us can observe our
activities and steer them with decision-making. We may not always
be able to steer our physiological responses, which also produce
certain moods within the brain and nerves.
But we can observe those moods and decide whether we are going
to let them control our activities. While more shoplifters are likely
to have bad moods, we aren’t forced to shoplift by a bad mood.
If biochemicals create emotion, they would be present only in and
prior to particular emotions. Instead, they are present during a vari-
ety of emotions. Again physiological changes can be brought about
by biochemicals. But emotions stem from life: There is no emotion
left in a dead body.
Furthermore, if chemicals could contain emotions, these emotional
characteristics should exist in the chemicals both inside and outside
of the particular body of the person experiencing the emotion. Illus-
trating this, health workers regularly remove biochemicals (in the
form of body fluids such as blood, plasma and marrow) from one
subject and transfer them (or their components) to other subjects.
In none of these cases are emotions transferred from one person to
another.
Supposed “emotional biochemicals” do not retain or display the
emotions of their donor once they are transferred to a new host.
Certainly, if we found that blood transfusions resulted in changes in
personality or emotions, blood transfusions would not be very
popular.
Thus, the basis for a biochemical self fails thousands of times a day
around the world in hospitals that transfuse blood.
43
This is not to mean that injected biochemicals cannot stimulate a

physical response within a new host, which may or may not facili-
tate particular emotions to be expressed. The organism receiving
epinephrine or another neurochemical may experience a physical
response consistent with the vanilla biochemical response related to
that particular molecular structure.
Injected adrenaline may produce a physical reaction of increased
heart rate, for example. However, adrenaline drawn from one per-
son during a fearful response will not induce a recall of the donor’s
fears. The recipient’s physical response after the injection will nei-
ther reflect the appropriate response required for the donor’s par-
ticular fears.
Once the inner self responds to a particular sensory input – often
signaled through biochemical reception – the unique emotional
response of the self stimulates particular biochemicals to translate
and express the emotion. In other words, these biochemicals help
translate the emotional self’s response.
Just as current travels within an electrical wire, neurotransmitters
help transmit sensory feedback messages to the inner self. They also
help transmit emotional responses from the inner self. The self is
the observer of sensory input, and stimulates feedback responses
utilizing some of the same biochemical transmission pathways.
We must therefore conclude that there is someone inside who is
either – directly or indirectly – receiving and responding to the
body’s neural transmissions. Any response that proceeds with direc-
tion and decision-making must come from a conscious source.
Otherwise we would simply be machines.
Fuel may ignite a spark in the cylinder of an automobile engine
causing combustion, which will push the rods into motion, exerting
force on the axel cranks.
Fuel is not the original stimulant, however. Nor does fuel contain
the ability to guide and steer the car. Rather, there is a driver within
the car who consciously turns the key and drives the car to a par-
ticular destination using the steering wheel, accelerator, and brakes.
44
The driver optionally stimulates the flow of fuel through the injec-
tion system. The driver can also stop the flow of fuel by turning off
the car.
If the fuel were the driver, then the car would have no destination.
The car would move around aimlessly, banging into buildings and
other cars.
Rather, just as the car has a driver, there must be a deeper force
within the body that is driving the chemistry of the body. This is
simply proven by the observation that something within the body is
making choices.
While our biological chemistry may indicate a problem within our
body, something deeper is making decisions based upon what that
biochemistry indicates. For example, one person may immediately
take some aspirin when they have a headache, while another person
may elect to massage their temples. Who is the person making the
decision? The neurochemistry responses are the same in both cases.
We can check this proof when the body dies. Just after death, there
are no emotions exhibited in the dead body. Yet all the body’s bio-
chemistry is still within the body.
Informational DNA
A newer version of the biochemical identity put forth by modern
scientists is the notion that the self is the genetic information, or
DNA of the body. Admittedly, the mapping of the genome (the vari-
ous sequences) and further mapping of the individual allele locations
within codons – often referred to as haplotypes or collectively as hap-
maps – reveals a complexity of design beyond our current under-
standing.
Over the past three decades, tremendous research efforts have gone
into creating statistical models to match the physical traits of hu-
mans and other organisms with particular gene sequences. As a
result, thousands of genomes have been tabulated and various hap-
lotypes have been connected with physical characteristics. In addi-
tion, different diseases have been connected to certain sequences.
45
Although these efforts are laudable, science has unfortunately suc-

cumbed to a blurring of the relationship between these genetic traits
and life itself. The erroneous assumption is that specific gene se-
quences – the particular arrangement of alleles or nucleotides at
different positions of the DNA molecule – are the cause of those
physical or behavioral traits. While some might call this a chicken-
and-egg problem, the solution is certainly clearer than this.
This assumption that the self is the hapmap would be equivalent to
saying a telephone is the source of the voice we hear through its
speaker. It is elementary: The voice on the line is coming from a
remotely located person. We may not be able to see the person while
we are speaking with them, but we know a person is there because
we exchange personal communication and perform a type of voice-
print analysis.
Plus, the voice on the other side responds to our statements with a
clarity that can only come from a conscious speaker. (Computerized
attendants have progressed substantially, but we can still determine
a live speaker.)
A specific sequencing of genetic haplotypes is a complex structure.
This complex coding indicates a programming of sorts. As with any
programming, there must be a motive and source of the code. It is
not logical to assume that a complex, well-designed code with spe-
cific rules (as genetic research connecting physical traits to specific
codes indicates) comes from a chaotic and accidental design. Just as
we can connect the lucid voice on the phone to a personal con-
sciousness, we can tie the sequencing of genes to a living, inten-
tional component, ultimately driving the design.
If we were to extract a DNA molecule from our skin or body fluids,
and place it onto the table or even in a test tube, we will find there
is no display of life. Just as the body after the self leaves is lifeless,
DNA or RNA molecules extracted from a living body become life-
less. We should also note that RNA transcription and genetic muta-
tion is impossible without a conscious being present. While we can
force a mutation upon an organism or its seed through the vehicle
of a virus, the mutation will only become duplicated through the
46
organism if there is a living force present in that organism. A dead

body will not replicate the mutation.
Furthermore, the proposal that unique personality is determined by
genetic code is immediately refuted by children who have inherited
their genes from the parents. Children are each born with distinct
personalities, talents and character traits not necessarily portrayed in
their parents or grandparents. While we are quick to notice similar
traits among our children, each has their own character and person-
ality. We can partially account for similar behaviors that children
also learn and mimic their parents to a great degree.
Even still, we can easily observe children behaving significantly
different from their parents in similar situations. We can also wit-
ness the many conflicts that arise between children and parents.
Certainly we know the extraordinary talents of child music geniuses
or savants are not passed down genetically. In most musical savant
cases, the parents have relatively little or no musical gift whatsoever.
Furthermore, if personality and behavior were genetically driven
then genetically identical twins would live parallel lives and have
identical personalities. They would also make the same decisions in
life, leading to identical lifestyles and histories.
This is not supported by the research. Twins live dramatically
unique and individual lives from each other. Depending upon how
much time they spend together, they will make distinctly different
choices in life as well. In general, they display significantly unique
and often diverse behavior. Hur and Rushton (2007) studied 514
pairs of two to nine year old South Korean monozygotic and dizy-
gotic twins.
Their results indicated that 55% of the children’s pro-social behav-
ior related to genetic factors and 45% was attributed to non-shared
environmental behavior. (It should be noted that shared environ-
mental factors could not be eliminated from the 55%.) In another
recent study from Quebec, Canada (Forget-Dubois et al. 2007) an
analysis of 292 mothers revealed that maternal behavior only ac-
47
counted for a 29% genetic influence at 18 months and 25% at 30

months.
In a study of 200 African-American twins, including 97 identical
pairs, genetics accounted for about 60% of the variance in smoking
(Whitfield et al. 2007). In a study done at the Virginia Common-
wealth University’s Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genet-
ics, (Maes et al. 2007) a large sampling revealed individual behavior
was only about 38-40% attributable to genetics, while shared envi-
ronment was 18-23% attributable and unshared environmental in-
fluences were attributable in 39-42%. These studies are also con-
firmed by others, illustrating a large enough variance from 100% to
indicate the presence of a separate and individual element involved
within each twin.
Distinct identity despite genetic sameness is further evidenced by
the fact that identical twins will have distinctly different fingerprints,
irises and other physical traits despite identical genetics.
Researchers have found that twins will make significantly different
lifestyle choices later in life such as sexual preference, drug abuse,
and alcoholism. We might compare this situation again to our car
driver:
Say two people purchase the exact same model and year car. As they drive off
the lot, their ongoing driving performance is examined. Comparing the two cars
in the future will reveal the cars performed in much the same way: They had
similar mechanical issues and had particular characteristics such as gas-mileage,
top-speeds, and acceleration patterns. However, the researchers would also dis-
cover significant variances between the cars’ usage in the future. While one was
driven hard, the other was pampered. One was driven across the country several
times while the other mostly stayed in the garage.
As the differences between use of the cars pile up, we will find a
large variance between the two cars’ comparative resulting perform-
ance. While the car type might have influenced a portion of the
car’s performance, the rest is due to a combination of environ-
mental factors (where the car was driven and stored) and the discre-
48
tionary choices of their drivers. In other words, their differences

would stem from having two different drivers.
Because twins have the same genetics – just as the cars share the
same make and model numbers – the unique factors related to the
eventual circumstances of their lives stem from the fact that each
body contains a distinct inner self.
The Soul and the Self
Empirical evidence reveals the existence of a transcendental con-
scious being operating the body. This is the “I” or the self of each
of us. The self is the source of personality and life, which the body
expresses through physical activity over its lifetime. Since there is
energy, personality and movement in a living body prior to death,
followed by a lack of movement, personality and energy afterward,
the source of the energy and personality must leave the body at
death. Since each personality is unique and different from all other
personalities, each conscious being is an independent entity.
When considering the conscious being outside of the body or after
the death of the body, many will imagine the conscious being looks
like the physical body somehow – with the same eyes, face, sex and
stature as their physical body. Many media depictions will illustrate
this with someone who has died appearing as a ghostly version of
that person’s aged body before they died.
Although a departed self might still be able to project a mental im-
age comparable to a gross physical body shortly after death, the
nature of the conscious being is thoroughly distinct from the tem-
porary physical body. As Aristotle and Socrates described to their
students, the physical body is completely abandoned by the self at
death.
Many philosophers have proposed that after death, the conscious
being either fades into “nothingness,” or expands into “everything.”
This philosophy proposes that the conscious being does not have
an individual identity after death: Instead, the individual person or
conscious being simply vanishes and evaporates into space. This is
often described as merging into “nothingness” – also called the
49
void – or merging into “everything” – sometimes referred to as the

white light. These two assumptions are basically the same proposi-
tion because either way there is no eventual individuality.
A simple observation has been made by many ancient philosophers:
Each individual is born with a unique and distinct personality. This
individuality is expressed by the special talents unique to each of us.
These special talents point to an individual existence prior to birth.
If a person existed as an individual prior to birth, is it logical that a
person would lose that individuality after death?
The conscious being is the underlying source of our personality; our
feelings; emotions; desires; the ability to love; and the desire to be
loved. This personality is distinct from the mental programming
taking place through the brainwaves and neural network of the
physical body.
Beyond the programming, each of us is an independent, active con-
scious being with a central objective of receiving love. Does it ap-
pear logical that this active being – continually seeking love and
relationships – would want to suddenly abandon these propensities
to permanently lose our existence within a void or nothingness?
Still others contend that after death we merge into a vast ocean of
consciousness. The question this brings is; what is the purpose of
existing within a body as an individual, if we evaporate into a vague
ocean of consciousness? What should the purpose of temporary
separate existence be then? Could a collective vague consciousness
have a purpose?
Furthermore, the living self has maintained a steady active existence
throughout many years of a changing physical body. Does it seem
logical that the death of the body would affect a person’s inherent
will to survive and prosper? Should the death of our temporary
body abruptly end our desire to love and exchange love? Should the
active conscious being who is beyond the physical scope of our
senses remand itself to the fate of the physical body?
Purpose and activity are the key distinctions between living and
dead matter. Both of these elements (purpose and activity) indicate
50
the existence of individuality. The very definition of consciousness

requires individuality. Consciousness requires awareness. Awareness
of something or someone requires a personality separate from that
object or person being aware of. So an ‘ocean of consciousness’
would logically be an oxymoron.
Consistent with the ancient teachings of all major religions, the an-
cient philosophers and the vast majority of western scientists prior
to the emergence of the concept of a chaotic accidental evolution of
species, we propose the existence of a unique individual entity tran-
scendental to the gross physical plane.
Plato, Socrates and most of the ancient Greek philosophers referred
to the self as the soul. The translation is thought to originate with
Aristotle who described the self with the Latin telos. Rather than a
vague spirit-like organ, telos most specifically translates to a person-
ality with purpose, will, and character. In this context, we would
emphasize that each of us does not possess a soul: each of us is a
soul.
That being said, some refer to the soul as one’s level of morality or
even one’s mission. As we seek not to confuse, here we will refer to
our identity as the self or the conscious being. We may also refer to the
self as the transcendental conscious being to emphasize that the self
is not within the physical or material plane. Rather, the conscious
being accesses the physical plane via the vehicle of the physical
body.
Of course, the word spiritual can also be misunderstood. Spirit can
be confused with the subtle physical world of ghosts, which are
conscious beings still embodied within the physical mind and subtle
aethereal or plasma layer. They may be without the more gross
physical body, but they still live within the confines of the physical
dimension.
For clarity, we will utilize the word transcendental as indicating the
dimension beyond these gross and subtle physical layers. To this
end we might also refer to the transcendental conscious being as the
inner self, identifying the transcendental self occupying the physical
51
body. Furthermore, we distinguish the term living organism as a

physical body driven by and animated by an individual transcenden-
tal conscious being.
Distinguishing Life from Matter
The difference between the body of a living organism and the con-
scious being within requires a clear differentiation between matter
and life. This investigation has been captured under the term auto-
poiesis. Autopoiesis is the study of the characterization of a complete
living system as it compares to either a part of another living system
or non-living matter.
To investigate this we could first analyze the difference between a
living organism and a chunk of matter without the component of
life. An easy comparison would be between single-celled bacteria
and a rock.
A single-cell bacterium is a complete living organism. Studies have
shown bacteria indeed respond to stimuli, avoid death, and avert
pain. As we know from fighting diseases, bacteria will intelligently
mutate and adapt to antibiotics.
The new antibiotic-resistant “superbugs” are examples of bacteria
that have intelligently navigated and overcome challenges. Living
bacteria also conduct the other activities required for independent
survival: eating, digesting, reproduction, movement, response to
stimuli, sense perception, the intention to survive, and self-
organization. So we know that bacteria are alive.
The rock displays none of these characteristics independently.
There is no independent movement. There is no consumption.
There is no quest for survival. There is no reproduction. While a
rock may be broken up into pieces, there is no growth and no
mechanism for protection. There is also no perception.
Perception? Did the bacteria display perception? Absolutely. We
know this because bacteria will evade potential threats, and also
attempt to defend themselves against threats by producing different
52
chemicals and barriers of defense. This is evident in MDROs –

which are multi-drug resistant organisms.
Once a microorganism has developed the ability to defend against a
particular chemical or antibiotic, it can share this ability with an-
other microorganism. This ability to share comes in the form of
exchanging DNA packets called plasmids.
These plasmids give them the ability to develop tools to evade a
specific antibiotic or group of antibiotics. Because microorganisms
of the same species will travel, and because the readily exchange
these plasmids, a particular microorganism can easily become resis-
tant to many types of antibiotics. Researchers have found that some
MDROs will develop resistance to more than ten different antibiot-
ics or antibiotic families. Some of these include dangerous MDROs
include species of Escherichia coli, Enterococcus, Staphylococcus,
Salmonella, Campylobacter, and others. These MRDOs are also
often referred to as superbugs.
First we should realize that antibiotics are produced from living
organisms, typically bacteria. The antibiotics are extracted from eggs
or other mediums for bacteria cultures. So bacteria becoming resis-
tant to a particular antibiotic are doing nothing differently than they
do in nature – they are learning how to defend themselves against
their enemy bacteria. And in bacterialand, excreted biochemicals are
the weapon of choice.
Each bacteria species can produce particular types of biochemicals
that will damage others, in an effort to maintain their territory. This
is how they protect themselves.
Bacteria will also develop abilities to fend off these biochemical
attacks. They may develop thicker membranes. Or their cytoplasms
(the liquid inside their membranes) may produce countermeasures
that neutralize the particular biochemical attack.
So we find that not only do bacteria have the ability to protect
themselves against damaging biochemicals produced by their ene-
mies, but they also will share that ability with other bacteria.
53
How do the bacteria know which bacteria (and biochemicals) to

defend against, and which bacteria to share their newfound abilities
with?
Perception. Bacteria must be able to perceive the difference between a
“comrade” bacteria and an enemy bacteria. In other words, bacteria
are able to somehow sense other living organisms.
Furthermore, the nature of bacteria cultures indicates that bacteria
are also able to communicate with each other. This is often referred
to as quorum sensing.
Quorum sensing was discovered by biologists that found that sin-
gle-celled dinoflagellates communicate with each other to coordi-
nate the phosphorescence that we see on the ocean surface at night.
This is also called bioluminescence. The dinoflagellates communi-
cate with each other and coordinate a moment in time where a large
group of them will light up together.
This quorum sensing indicates that even the smallest, single celled
organism is alive, and conducts practically all of the signs of life:
Perception, the desire to survive, consumption, reproduction,
growth and development.
None of these are available in a rock. Yet many rocks will contain
all of the same molecules and atoms that a living organism will con-
tain. A rock will typically contain most of the same elements – those
fundamental atoms such as hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, carbon and
so on – that a living organism will contain.
In fact, most paleoscientists know that much of our planet’s surface
rocks are made up of a combination of volcanic materials and an-
cient biomass: Dead bodies, in other words.
Yet the rock does not metabolize. The rock does not grow. The
rock does not perceive. The rock does not desire to survive.
This indicates that there is a living element within the living organ-
ism – whether bacteria or human – that is not contained within the
rock.
54
Since the rock contains all the matter, but is not alive, and since a
body of an organism after death contains all the matter, yet is no
different from the rock, we know that the element of life is a non-
physical element: The conscious being, in other words, is not physi-
cal.
Equality among the Living
Gradually we are learning just how smart other organisms large and
small are. Marine researchers have realized for example that sharks
actually have keen senses and the ability to ‘see’ their prey by pick-
ing up subtle waveforms. In addition to a keen sense of smell and
rather good eyesight, the shark has a series of electroreceptors posi-
tioned within lateral line channels throughout the shark’s head, run-
ning down the length of the body into the tail.
Many fish and even amphibians also have lateral line organs, allow-
ing the fish to sense various waveforms from the surrounding water
environment. In sharks, these lateral line channels are implanted
with sensors that allow a shark to pick up subtle electromagnetic
pulses of life in its environment.
This allows sharks to recognize targets or enemies hiding within the
sand or in murky waters. These electroreceptors can also sense mo-
tion from extreme distances. The shark can identify the splashing of
a seal pup up to two miles away, for example. Through these sen-
sory ampules, a shark can also sense fear or panic among other or-
ganisms. What is the shark sensing with these electroreceptors?
These are the organism’s combined biophoton emissions – wave-
forms reflecting conscious emotions – given off by the unlucky
living organism.
Repeatedly, scientists have found that all living organisms commu-
nicate with their offspring, families and peers. Bees also communi-
cate with their queen and their queen’s guards in the hive. A soldier
bee will report to the hive with a phenomenal dance that, by the
shape and motion of the dance, will communicate significant threats
to the hive, where great pollen locations are, and many other things.
55
Over many years of cruel animal research, test results have revealed
that animals have the same ‘self-concept’ awareness as humans. This
self-concept is evident by their responses to various environmental
challenges.
The functions of their mechanical physiology has also confirmed
that this self-concept pervades through all living tissues, reflected by
the display of episodic memory – remembering specifics about the
past events and others. For this reason, we see animals learning
quickly which activities result in pain, and which activities result in
pleasure (Dere et al. 2006). They respond simply because every con-
scious being seeks pleasure.
Within the laboratory, science has blurred the distinction between
living and non-living matter. Bitbol and Luisi (2004), confirmed by
Bourgine and Stewart (2004) and others, sums up the distinction
between living organisms and non-living matter to be founded
upon on the principle of cognition.
As stated clearly by Bourqine and Stewart, “A system is cognitive if and
only if sensory inputs serve to trigger actions in a specific way, so as to satisfy a
viability constraint.” Bourqine and Stewart also contend “A system that
is both autopoietic and cognitive is a living system.” Bitbol and Luisi add to
this by saying “the very lowest level of cognition is the condition for life,” and
“the lowest level of cognition does not reduce to the lowest level of autopoiesis.”
When we consider the element of cognition, we bring into focus the
nature of awareness. Cognition is the awareness of self and non-self.
The awareness of self and non-self are required for a living organ-
ism to consider survival important. Without an awareness of self
and non-self, there is no intention for fulfillment. Without intention
and the awareness of self, there is no consciousness. Without con-
sciousness, there is no life.
All of these examples, together with the science presented earlier
regarding the living element within the body illustrate further that
all living organisms contain the same basic element of life: A non-
physical conscious being.
56
And because every organism displays the same characteristics of life – perception,
growth, reproduction, the desire for survival and so on – the type of physical
structure of the organism has nothing to do with the nature of the non-physical
conscious being within.
This of course means that all conscious beings are of the same es-
sence, and therefore, are all related. This is why a conscious being
with the body of a dog can become a friend to a conscious being
within the body of a human: Underneath their particular bodies and
their particular minds, they are of the same essence.
As we direct this back to ourselves, we suddenly realize what we are
looking at when we look into the eyes of an animal: We are seeing a
reflection of one of our brothers. Deep within that body, under the
fear of the mind and the anger produced by their desire to survive,
is a conscious being just like me.
Among humans, most of us assume that our identity runs deeper
than our physical body. A person with a black body wants equality
with a person with a white body because that person considers that
beneath the skin, we are all of the same substance.
Similarly, an obese person wants to be treated equally with someone
of a more slender stature. Why would we request equality unless we
are assuming we have deeper identities?
We can show that the physical body does not relate to equality
when we consider how we accept quadriplegics, paraplegics, ampu-
tees, and so on. Now in the United States, by law, we must treat
those with deranged bodies the same as we treat those with healthy
human bodies. We cannot discriminate against a person with a de-
ranged body.
This obviously means that we accept that we are not these physical
bodies, and there is an element of life that is separate from the
shape of the physical body.
Can we extend this same equality to animals, plants, fish, insects
and single-celled creatures? Absolutely. As we’ve shown here, the
57
conscious being is non-physical. This means that the physical body

has nothing to do with the conscious being within.
And since every living organism is displaying the same basic charac-
teristics of life: perception, growth, reproduction, consumption, the
desire for survival and so on, we can logically assert that all living
organisms are essentially driven by the same type of conscious be-
ing.
We might compare this to different cars and trucks on the freeway.
We see so many different vehicles as we are driving. There are
trucks, cars, SUVs, motorcycles, buses and so on. Yet we do not say
that a person driving a motorcycle is any different in essence than a
person driving a truck do we?
Absolutely not. This is because the vehicle is made of a different substance
than the driver. The vehicle is made of metal and plastic, with an en-
gine and rubber wheels. The driver is made of flesh, bones, blood
and organs. The drivers are of a different substance than the vehi-
cles they drive. Therefore, everyone accepts that regardless of the
car or truck a person drives, the drivers are essentially the same:
human.
In the same way, we can know that the non-physical living individ-
ual within the physical body is of a different substance than the
living body. And since all living organisms among the different spe-
cies have the same characteristics (perception, growth, reproduc-
tion, consumption, the desire to survive and so on) we can know
that regardless of the species, every living organism is maintained by
a non-physical living individual of the same essence.
With this information, we can now understand the essence of life
that lives within each living organism from each species.
This of course means that something else is going on here. What is
it? Why are there so many species and what are our brethren con-
scious beings doing occupying other species of organisms?
The first step of solving this problem is to investigate death a bit
further. What takes place at the time of death?
58
59
Chapter Three
Mind versus Consciousness

The Theory of Accidental Evolution
Is the mind the same as consciousness? This can be rephrased: Is
the self the same as the mind? Is the mind the self? While we know
the mind expresses consciousness, can they be separated? Let’s dis-
cuss this directly using the latest science and practical knowledge.
Changing our Mind
The key solution to this question is the observation that the mind
can change. We see how the mind can change as individuals change
courses in life; decide to do different things; join different political
parties; get divorced; or even make dramatic changes in their lives,
all because they have changed their mind.
This means we need to ask: then who is it that decides to change our
mind? In order to change the mind there must be someone – a
driver and observer – who can intend and initiate that change. Fur-
thermore, as noted in these works, the process required in order to
change the mind is quite difficult.
Who is the constant force making the determination to change the
mind; despite all of its former thinking habits? Lastly, who is remain-
ing to reap the rewards once the mind has been changed? If the self
(consciousness) is the mind, and the mind is changed, that former
self is gone once the mind changes.
Therefore, no one remains to realize any reward, since the last mind
– the one who initially read the self-help guru’s book – is gone, re-
placed by the changed mind.
What is the Mind?
Put simply, the mind is like a software program and the brain is like
a computer. Computer hardware consists of wires and chips, which
communicate and store information in the form of electronic on-
off states – also called bits.
61
A combination of these on-off states or bits makes up a byte. A

byte is like a word and bits are like letters. A string of these bytes
becomes an instruction. A group of these instructions becomes a
program, and together, programs make up the software of the
computer.
The actual wires and transistors of the computer (and the various
other electronics such as resistors) make up the hardware of the
computer – they are the solid objects, while the software is the in-
formation that instructs the hardware operations. The software will
define how the hardware works, in other words.
In a computer, the software information is stored on hard diskettes
located within the computer’s hardware. Electromagnetic pulses are
recorded onto the magnetic medium of these hard disks. This is
done through a magnetizing head. Once the disk information is
stored, it can be retrieved using another type of head – a magnetic
reader.
The computer’s operations are ultimately instructed by the operator,
who sits aloof from the computer and its software. The operator
utilizes the computer by staring into the computer screen while
operating a keyboard and mouse. Through the screen, keyboard and
mouse, the operator drives the operations of the computer.
As the operator sends commands through the keyboard and mouse,
the screen indicates the feedback of those instructions. Through
this system, the computer will be driven to do many complicated
tasks, including hunting around the world-wide web (internet) for
all sorts of information, games and communications with others.
The mind’s software transcends the brain and body just as the
computer’s software transcends the actual hard disk and other
hardware of the computer. Just as the operating system software
provides an interfacing language between the various hardware de-
vices of the computer, the mind interacts closely with the limbic
system and neural networks of the brain to execute commands to
the body. These commands operate the body through the means of
electromagnetic pulses through neurons.
62
These electromagnetic pulses through neurons make up a series of

waveforms. A single wave could be compared to a bit, while a series
of interfering waves could be compared to a software byte.
Just as the software of the computer must be instructed by an op-
erator using commands entered through a keyboard and/or mouse,
the mind is ultimately driven by the inner self. The self uses the
mind to send commands through the brain’s prefrontal cortex and
limbic system.
The body is also rigged with sensory nerves and sensory organs.
These reflect back to the mind images of the events of the body.
These images include what the eyes see, what the tongue tastes,
what the nose smells, what the skin touches and so on. These im-
ages are then reflected onto the ‘screen’ of the mind for the inner
self – the operator – to perceive.
Just as the computer operator looks at the computer monitor screen
for input and feedback, the inner self perceives the electromagnetic
images of the mindscreen for the body’s sensory input and feed-
back.
Like the body, the mind is an instrument of the intentional self. The
mind is a subtle sorting, translating and recording device. The inten-
tional self is the driver of the mind. The mind takes in the images
from the senses, and categorizes them onto its mind-brain mapping
system, while the self is the viewer of the mapped images.
Using these images, the inner self steers the mind – which then
steers the body – in an attempt to achieve the objectives of the self.
This is executed through the neural network of the body.
This means that the mind is a changeable, subtle mechanism dis-
tinct from the self. The separate existence of the mind can be easily
shown in practical behavior: We can observe the mind’s recording
ability when a vision or piece of music can be recalled minutes, days
and even years after first being sensed.
After watching a movie with special effects, we can close our eyes
and watch a scene’s mental imprint on the mind. We can also replay
63
music recorded by the mind. We may hum or sing the words of a

song we heard previously, with the tune replaying in our mind long
after the song was heard.
After we look at an image, we can close our eyes and see that same
image imprinted upon the mind.
Like a television or a radio, we can also change the mind’s images.
We can decide to change our focus from one image to another. We
can also observe how the mind can change from new images. We
can watch the mind’s images and see how new sensory inputs affect
those images.
Our mind can also associate and compare previously stored images
with the incoming sensory images of tastes, sounds, tactile sensa-
tions and other images our senses collect over the years. As the
mind imprints and arranges these images, the inner self subtly di-
rects the mind to record these images, cataloging them according to
priority. As these are sorted, the mind’s priorities might be changed
by the self. Physical reactions to those images might be rearranged –
driven by the self’s response to watching the mindscreen. In other
words, we can each change our mind.
Where is the Mind Located?
Western science has been struggling with the location of the mind
for thousands of years. The Greek physician Galen of Pergamon
(129-210 BC) struggled with the then-accepted cardiocentric theory –
which proposed that the seat of the mind is in the heart. Galen
produced a number of anatomical experiments with vivisection,
illustrating the difference between the central nervous system and
the arterial system.
Despite some intense debate among the Stoics and others following
Galen’s experiments, there was increasing acceptance that the cen-
tral nervous system played an integral role in the mind’s processes.
Yet from these ancient times to the modern day, researchers are still
speculating and debating on the precise location of the mind.
64
The planaria worm (Dugesia dorotocephala) was Dr. James McCon-

nell’s favorite lab subject for his conditioning studies that began in
1955. In one cruel test, Dr. McConnell subjected a group of pla-
naria to bright light followed by a mild electric shock. The shock
would make the worms curl up in pain.
This light-and-shock sequence was repeated hundreds of times for
reinforcement. Eventually the worms would immediately curl up
once the light was turned on, with or without a shock. This illus-
trated not only the worms’ conscious attempts to avoid pain (a con-
cept often ignored by modern science), but also their ability to re-
member the circumstances surrounding the pain. Where were these
memories stored?
The planaria worm has a tiny brain and central nervous system, just
as most humans and animals have. However, these worms have an
incredible ability to reproduce immediately upon being cut or sliced.
This is commonly referred to as regeneration. Not all sliced worms
regenerate on both ends. Most will at least regenerate at the tail end.
Many amphibians also have this ability – they will typically regener-
ate a limb following its amputation. The planarian worm, however,
can be cut in half and each half will develop into a physically com-
plete organism. This is thought to occur through a regeneration of
the head on the tail side of the split and vice versa. Each side then will
develop a full body, tail and head.
In order to test for the location of memory, Dr. McConnell cruelly
sliced the planarians into two pieces, in the middle of the body be-
tween the head and tail. Assuming memory was stored in the head
end – where the central nervous system is – the head-end regenera-
tion should remember the light-shock training and curl up. Mean-
while, the tail-end regeneration would not remember the shock
treatment.
Not so fast. Contrary to this assumption, both regenerated worm
halves remembered the training, and in many cases, the tail-
generated worms remembered the training better than the brain-
side worm did. This research theoretically indicated that memory
was not necessarily stored in the brain (McConnell et al. 1960).
65
This research underscores some of the studies referenced earlier,

showing continuing memory and cognition despite partial brain
removal or damage to loci known for particular functions. In Mish-
kin (1978) and Mumby et al. (1992), for example, surgical removal of
the amygdala and hippocampus resulted either in minor memory
impairment or none at all.
Vargha-Khadem and Polkey (1992) reviewed multiple studies of
hemidecortication – the removal of at least half of the brain. Full
cognitive recovery following hemidecortication resulted in more
than 80% of all subjects.
Magnetic imaging of human patients following brain damage has
confirmed the movement of mental functions from one part of the
brain to the other. This has resulted in the theory of brain plasticity,
as discussed earlier. It is not difficult to logically conclude that if
mental function moves from one part of the brain to another, the
mind must have a composition separate from the brain tissues.
Truly, this composition has continued to baffle researchers. Imag-
ing can locate electromagnetic activity indicating cognition, memory
and decision-making – the executive activities – within the brain.
Electromagnetic activity may also indicate active regions and path-
ways during particular thought activity. Yet the precise location and
composition of the mind and memory has remained mysterious.
We should consider also that the brain is not restricted to the gray
matter within the skull. This region of the brain is composed of the
right and left hemispheres of the cerebrum, the cerebellum, and the
brain stem – composed of the midbrain, the pons and medulla. Also
included in the brain is the spinal column and spinal nerves. It would
thus be more accurate to describe the “brain” as the central nervous
system or the neural network, which expands to the peripheral nervous
system located throughout the body.
The spinal column and spinal nerve system serve as a bridge be-
tween the lower activity centers (or chakras) and the higher and
more subtle waveform translation centers of the brain. From the
spinal column radiates various waveforms that stimulate organ ac-
66
tivity. These direct pathways from the spine drive the autonomic
systems and the programmed response centers throughout the cen-
tral nervous system.
The virtual link between the senses, the brain and the mind lies
hidden within the waveform interference patterns guided by the self
through the limbic system and imaging cortices. The inner self’s
executive processes are generated through the prefrontal cortex and
translated through the thalamus, hypothalamus and hippocampal
complex to their respective loci.
These areas are considered the interbrain. Using a network of subtle
and gross conduits, they negotiate the information between the
senses and the subtle mind. They also bridge the feedback of the
mind’s instructions and the initiation of brain and motor function.
For this reason, many physicians attribute the amygdala as being the
seat of emotion, although removal of it does not prevent emotion
to be exhibited.
Why is this? This is because emotion arises from the unseen inner
self. The limbic system provides an insertion point for emotions to
guide and steer the processes of prioritization. In other words, a
surgeon will not find any emotion within a surgically removed lim-
bic organ.
The neural network is a system of interconnected neurons. Con-
necting different parts of the anatomy are nerve tracts. Nerve tracts
are armored passageways that protect neurons and accelerate wave
transmissions. These tracts might be compared to a household net-
work of wire conduits protecting the wires and circuitry. When elec-
tricity must travel through underground wires, heavy-duty conduit
piping will be used as shielding. These pipe tubes protect the wires
from the decomposing elements of the soil. They also protect the
local environment from electricity running through the wiring.
Nerve tracts serve similar purposes within the body. They provide
the sheathing allowing pulsed waveforms to channel throughout the
body. They also conduct and direct informational pulses to specific
locations around the body.
67
The intentional reflections of the self are translated through the

mind into physiological instructions. Once translated, they will
stimulate both the motor cortex and the thalamus and hypothala-
mus. The thalamus regulates or adjusts thermogenesis, which con-
trols the body’s heat levels, providing a foundation for metabolic
activity. Meanwhile the hypothalamus negotiates the sympathetic
and parasympathetic activities of the body’s autonomic system
through the stimulation of the pituitary gland. Via the hypothala-
mus, the mind dictates control to regulate the functions of the
body’s metabolic activities through the pathways of the endocrine
system.
Through the vehicle of the motor cortex, the mind stimulates
physical activity. We can thus conclude from these basic physiologi-
cal cascades – confirmed by many years of research – that the
physical interface or conduit between the mind and the physical
body is located in the limbic system. This might be compared to the
magnetic heads that ‘read’ the polarity states recorded onto a com-
puter’s hard disks.
The cascade of signals from the limbic system is also regulated by
the activities of the pineal gland, which coordinate with the rhyth-
mic SCN cells to secrete melatonin. Melatonin triggers a cascading
pathway to slow metabolism, leading to sleep and cell repair. Mela-
tonin levels are balanced by other metabolic biochemicals stimu-
lated through other command cascades. Examples of these are cor-
tisol and the thyroid hormones.
All of these physical components of the brain and signaling systems
fall within the perimeter of the mind. The brain is a physical trans-
fer and conversion mechanism. The mind is a holographic echoing
mechanism utilizing interference patterns and standing waveforms
to play out the intentions of the self.
Dr. Jim Tucker, a professor at the University of Virginia, compares
the mind’s relationship with the brain and body to a television set
(2005). Dr. Tucker explains that while the TV signal is translated
through the television set, the signal of television programming
originates from a remote location. In the same way, Dr. Tucker
68
explains, the mind is not the brain, but rather, he insists, the signals
of the mind are transmitted through the brain.
The neurological research headed up by Dr. Robert Knight illus-
trated that brainwaves allow regions of the brain to communicate
using combinations of interactive alpha, beta, gamma and theta
waves. According to the research, the synchronization or coupling
effect of these various waves – together with their timing and fre-
quency – transmit specific information.
We can certainly compare the television and television program-
ming – like the computer and computer software – to the brain and
the mind. However, the transfer of the information occurs in pre-
cisely the same fashion in all of these cases: Through waveform
interference pattern transmission.
This all implies the use of a subtle conscious sorting process. When
we consider computer memory, for example, data is not being re-
corded onto silicon. Silicon is acting as a conductor for the arrange-
ments of 0s and 1s. These assembled messages are magnetically
recorded onto a hard drive tape or disk. If we were to remove that
hard drive from the computer and look at it, we will not see any
data.
We might see a tiny round disk inside of the drive case – like a
miniature CD. If we pulled out the disk from the case and looked at
it, we still would not see any information. This is because the in-
formation is magnetically stored onto the surface of the disk.
Hard drive disks are coated with a metal alloy like iron oxide or
cobalt alloy. The surface is divided into tiny magnetic regions, each
separated to enable a polarizing of the molecules on the surface of
the disk. A single polar magnetized molecule contains no informa-
tion in itself. Nor is the information contained on the magnetic
reader. The combinations of polarity contain the message, which
are meaningless until they are compiled and converted by the soft-
ware. These on or off permutations must first be arranged into a se-
quence code into machine code by a translation program in the
69
CPU. This code is then translated into operating system instructions

that feed information back to the operator via the monitor.
In the same way, although the physical anatomy of brain gyrus,
neurons and the various organs of the limbic system appear to con-
tain the information and memory that resonates through them, they
are no more containing our memories than the metal computer box
contains any data. Informational waveforms resonate through the
neurons, where they are crystallized, translated and broadcast into
the neural net: It is the translation of the waveform interference
patterns that creates the information.
The complex exchange of instantaneous waveform pulses moving
through the body is nothing short of astounding. Some estimate
that over six trillion waveform messages per minute are fired
through the nervous system alone – not including the higher fre-
quency microtubule pulses, the various hormone releases, the inter-
cellular biocommunication and the intracellular network. These
waveforms pulsing through the physical layers are all sorted for
priority and projected through the mind to be imaged by the self.
Research has illustrated that the left side of the brain is associated
with the thoughts relating to logic, language, and mathematics.
Meanwhile the right side of the brain has been associated with art,
fantasy, and music.
Further to this point of specialization, certain regions appear to
associate with certain mental skills and particular types of memories.
Auditory communication, for example, is associated with the tem-
poral lobe, while written motor skills have been linked with the
motor cortex of the frontal lobe.
Visual interaction usually utilizes the occipital lobe. Recent neuro-
logical research has confirmed that each of these brain functions
also run concurrent with particular types of brainwaves. We also
know a hierarchy of waveforms is slated to each thought-type. The
slower waves like delta and theta tend to accompany sleep and in-
trospection, while faster waves like beta and gamma waves tend to
accompany sensual cognition and information transfer.
70
This indicates that the inner self’s intentions are expressed through
the mind and brain via these brain waveforms. We can see this
should we gather various opinions from people. While a group of
people may receive the same information through the senses, a va-
riety of perceptions and conclusions will be made by each. Even
though the mind may meticulously gather incoming sensory infor-
mation, the unique self can shape and prioritize this information
through intention.
Scientific research confirms that information is sorted, prioritized,
organized and prepared for storage after input from the sensory
system. Research illustrates that the visual cortex will shape and
direct spatial visual information as it is being gathered through sig-
naling mechanisms. This process has been termed retino-cortical map-
ping (Johnston 1986).
The entire process of the brain and central nervous system would
be impossible without an operator and a power supply driving the
sorting operations of the mind. At the end of the day, the self is the
operator. The mind is the software and the brain is the CPU. The
body is the hardware.
Mental Health
The modern western notions of psychology and mental health as
we know them today have been only recently developed. In the
middle ages, a religious fanaticism took hold of Europe, which led
to the widespread belief that mental disease was the result of de-
monic possession. The ancient sciences had a much more logical
and realistic vision of the mind and the self.
Psychology and psychiatry is thought to have arose only during the
late nineteenth century: A limited view to say the least. Wilhelm
Wundt is thus considered the father of modern psychology. He
founded a laboratory in 1879 at the University of Leipzig – where
he was a professor.
Two years later, he founded the first European psychology journal,
and wrote a number of books on the subject. Professor Wundt’s
structuralism model of the mind proposed the dividing of the mind
71
into various parts, with each part performing different tasks. This
theory later gave way to the modern theories of functionalism and
behaviorism.
Unbeknownst to Wundt, the role of the unconscious mind had
been studied for thousands of years. The Greeks were known to use
hypnosis, and they studied the undercurrent of the mind together
with the dreamscape.
The art of hypnosis was somewhat lost, however, until it was re-
vived by Franz Mesmer in the eighteenth century. Mesmer’s pro-
posal was that hypnosis was created by a force of nature called ani-
mal magnetism, which seemingly overwhelmed his subjects as they
encountered magnets – adjusting the body’s tidal influences.
Interestingly, Mesmer also proposed that life moves through the
body via thousands of tiny channels. The flow of life through these
channels, he thought, was subject to various environmental influ-
ences, including spiritual forces and the movement of planets. One
might wonder whether Mesmer studied the ancient Ayurvedic
and/or Chinese systems. Nonetheless, hypnotism became contro-
versial to say the least.
It was not until Scottish surgeon James Braid announced that hyp-
notism was genuine in the 1840s that hypnotism was accepted as
anything other than a form of hysteria in Europe and America.
Hypnosis was largely overlooked during the years following. Its use
as a form of treatment only became more prominent in the late
nineteenth century and the early twentieth century. Today hypnosis
is accepted and widely used by many researchers, psychologists, and
psychiatrists.
The concept that prevailed in the nineteenth century was one de-
scribing the mind as consisting of different levels of consciousness.
A number of theories were proposed on the nature and functions
of these portions.
Probably the most famous were those of Dr. Pierre Marie Félix
Janet and Dr. Sigmund Freud, both prominent psychologists during
72
the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Janet is attributed

to have arrived at the theory of the mind being divided into conscious,
unconscious and preconscious parts. In the 1920s, Freud proposed the
mind contained three different components: the ego, the super-ego and
the id. Freud’s theory took center stage as a possible explanation of
various behavioral problems confronting physicians and psycholo-
gists since that time.
Both Freud and Janet gathered a great deal of information through
hypnotism. By hypnotizing people, Freud and Janet regressed them to
re-experience the behavior or thinking that occurred prior to a cur-
rent disorder. Though many insights and disease pathologies came
out of this research, it was generally regarded as having fallen short
of proving the existence of the three parts of the mind.
The proposal regarding mental disease stemming from the three
sections of the mind was rooted in the assumption that the mind is
constantly in conflict. Freud proposed that a conflict between these
three parts of the mind creates mental disturbance, while a balance
between them creates mental health. He proposed that the id is the
unconscious source encouraging the gratification of desires, rooted
in the most basic desires of survival. Meanwhile the super-ego was
supposed to have been in opposition with these desires, acting as
the conscience.
According to Freud’s theories, the ego supposedly mediates between
the id and super-ego, presenting the conscious portion of the mind to
the world. The science of psychology has accepted the assumption
of a conscious and subconscious apportionment of the mind. How-
ever, various ancillary theories have been presented over the years
since Janet and Freud.
Unsatisfied with the ability to change a person’s behavior using
hypnotism, Janet and Freud embarked on their now-famous meth-
ods of psychoanalysis. These methods are still used today by psy-
chologists and psychiatrists, and are actually quite basic: The patient
is simply encouraged to discuss problems and issues the patient
feels is related to the dilemma at hand.
73
The method of hypnosis in psychiatric treatment is based upon the

use of autosuggestion. The process usually begins with the hypnotist
positioning before the patient and suggesting the patient is becom-
ing sleepy and relaxed. Sometimes distractive rhythmic devices are
used, the most famous of which is a small pendulum.
As the trust in the hypnotist develops within the patient, the patient
dozes off into a state of suggestibility – being open to suggestion.
During this time, the patient may be clearly aware of the events
transpiring – or not, depending upon the suggestions of the hypno-
tist. Depending upon the type of hypnosis given, the patient may
also be drawn into a deeper state where the patient may not be able
to recall the hypnosis episode consciously. This has often been de-
scribed as an altered state of consciousness.
One discipline, which has its roots in Freud’s use of hypnotism, is
autogenics, introduced by Dr. Malcolm Caruthers in the 1970s. The
word autogenic refers to something generated from within. The
autogenic training system consists of becoming aware of the body’s
autonomic nervous system, and being able to control both sympa-
thetic and parasympathetic physical responses to stress. This was
accomplished primarily through visualization techniques.
Another important psychological system, also deeply steeped in the
concepts of the conscious and unconscious mind, is behaviorism.
Research into behavior modification was made famous by the work
of Ivan Pavlov, who in the early twentieth century worked with
both animals and humans to understand how the mind can connect
pleasure and pain with particular triggers, which bring about a trained
response.
The cruel dog-salivation experiments of Pavlov’s dog experiments
are quite famous, and they have given birth to a number of behav-
ioral psychological theories and practices. One of the more notable
behavioral theorists is B. F. Skinner. Professor Skinner’s research
into conditioning and behavior modification has become a founda-
tion for many of the psychological theories assumed today.
74
A distant relative of behaviorism is functionalism. This concept was

advanced by Dr. Alan Turing. In 1950, Dr. Turing laid out the fun-
damentals of the theory with his article Computing Machinery and Intel-
ligence. Dr. Turing proposed that the mind is a learning machine of
sorts, accumulating experience throughout ones lifetime.
Of course, behavior modification and conditioning – or operant con-
ditioning – has been commonly used by parents, teachers and au-
thoritarians over the duration of human existence. This system is
also embedded into the natural world. It is not hard to observe that
as we experience events and the consequences of our actions, we
begin to learn that certain activities have better results than do oth-
ers. This realization theoretically changes our behavior, leading to a
gradual process of evolution. Those who do not adjust their behav-
ior or learn the lessons, on the other hand, are destined to face a
recurrence of those lessons until they are learned.
After many years of hypnotherapy, the fundamental mechanisms –
along with the supposed conscious and unconscious mind them-
selves – are still considered mysterious by western science. Some
propose suggestibility is simply a state of mind and hypnosis is sim-
ply the succumbing to suggestion. However, there is enough docu-
mented evidence of hypnotized patients retrieving historical infor-
mation not accessible when conscious to consider the alternatives.
This lends credence to the position of the mind held by the ancient
sciences.
The Electromagnetic Brain
Over recent decades, the study of the mind has been directed to-
wards the chemical and electromagnetic properties of the brain’s
neurons. This trend towards a physiological interpretation of the
mind through the transduction of electrical activity between neu-
rons necessitates the assumption that the mind and brain are one
and the same.
The primary means for research promoting this assumption has
been the use of various radiative imaging systems such as EEG
(electroencephalography), MEG (magneto encephalography), MRI
75
(magnetic resonance imagery), PET (positron emission tomogra-

phy), and CAT (computer-aided tomography). These imaging sys-
tems each focus on different waveform attributes of brain neurons,
as they are altered by these different forms of radiation.
These imaging devices have determined that the bridge between the
mind and the brain are distinct electromagnetic waveforms called
brainwaves.
The notion that the mind and the brain were connected through
electromagnetic brainwaves has developed over the past century.
The mapping of the brain using electricity was pioneered during the
1920s by Dr. Wilder Penfield, who touched various parts of sub-
jects’ brains with electrode sensors while they lay conscious on the
operating table prior to or following brain surgery.
Dr. Penfield began noticing commonalities between patient re-
sponses as he touched certain parts of the brain. Dr. Penfield ac-
cumulated enough data over time to develop a map of the various
cortex regions and sensory regions. Dr. Penfield co-authored the
landmark Epilepsy and the Functional Anatomy of the Human Brain
(1951) with Dr. Herbert Jasper, a reference still used today.
Dr. Penfield’s research focused on epileptics initially. He observed
that regional brain activity was relative to types of thoughts, memo-
ries, and activity. Dr. Penfield found that if he stimulated a part of
the brain with the electrode, he could provoke a particular type of
memory.
This led to Dr. Penfield and the rest of the medical community
surmising that memory is retained within particular specialized brain
cells within certain regions. Furthermore, he concluded that particu-
lar parts of the brain specialized in certain types of thoughts or ac-
tivities. The subsequent mapping not only identified functional
parts of the brain. It also identified which types of memories were
theoretically stored within that particular region. These mapped
locations were called engrams.
In the 1940s, a psychologist named Dr. Karl Lashley conducted
cruel research that contradicted this notion that memories were
76
located in specific brain neurons. Dr. Lashley trained mice to par-

ticular tasks and then cruelly removed different parts of their brains.
He then reintroduced the mice to the same circumstances, and
found that despite brain cell areas associated with those memories
being removed, they were still able to remember the tasks learned
prior to the surgery. Furthermore, even when most of the rats’
brains were removed, the rats were unexpectedly still able to re-
member what was taught to them prior to the surgery.
A prominent neuroscientist, Dr. Karl Pribran, followed this re-
search with many years of study on memory and engrams. Dr. Pri-
bran’s initial research focused on the frontal cortex of monkeys and
cats, and his research identified specific areas of the brain associated
with particular cognitive functions.
However, he was intrigued by repeated results – like Dr. Lashley –
indicating that when specific neurons or regions were removed or
severed, cognition predominantly continued. For example, he found
that an image could still be perceived in detail when the optic nerve
was severed. This led to Dr. Pribran’s conclusion that perception
and cognition went deeper than the brain’s anatomy.
Years earlier, Dr. Lashley had entertained the notion of a wave in-
terference pattern for memories. Dr. Pribran worked closely with
renowned physicists Dr. David Bohm and Dr. Dennis Gabor – the
1971 physics Nobel laureate. Together they arrived at the notion
that cognition and memory were related to the mechanics of wave
transmission.
Using Fourier analysis – in which sine wave function is calculated
within the context of the action, the holonomic brain model of cognitive
function was born. This theory was proposed along the lines of the
Gabor function, which was put forth by Dr. Gabor to propose the
natural existence of the hologram (Pribran 1991).
When we examine some of the expansive research done in the field
of brainwaves, we see how both brain function and the mind are
closely related to wave mechanics. The electroencephalogram
77
measures the voltage potential differences among different regions

of the brain.
These voltage differences result in a wave formation, which can
range in wavelength, frequency and amplitude among a collection
of neurons. These brainwaves are not single units in themselves.
They are surges of collective interference patterns created by the
electrical pulses of neurons throughout the body.
Delta brainwaves cycle from one to three hertz, and tend to pre-
dominate during NREM (non-rapid eye movement) sleep, and
some meditation. During this type of sleep, dreaming is minimal
and the body is often in motion. Delta waves tend to resonate more
actively in the frontal cortex.
Delta waves correlate with an increase in the production and circu-
lation of growth hormone. One of growth hormone’s more impor-
tant attributes within the body is its ability to advance the healing
and regeneration process while our body is sleeping.
Theta brainwaves cycle at four to seven hertz and dominate during
mid-stage sleeping. Theta waves are more elusive, but seem to most
active during memory retrieval and consolidation during sleep, and
become more active in creative endeavors and behavior modifica-
tion during waking hours. The hippocampus appears to actively
accommodate and transduce these waves. Observations have noted
peak hippocampus activity during predominantly theta wave peri-
ods. The hippocampus is associated with spatial recognition and
short-term memory consolidation.
Alpha brainwaves will cycle at eight to thirteen cycles per second,
and are dominant during light sleep and dreaming, as well as some
meditation states. Alpha waves are seen dominant during memori-
zation tasks, especially those related to words, persons and visual
impressions.
Beta brainwaves will cycle at fourteen to thirty hertz and are domi-
nant during active, waking consciousness. These waves tend to be
prominent towards the front of the brain on the side predominating
78
during that activity. Beta waves reflect a state of focused attention

and activity.
A lack of beta waves during waking hours – or lower frequency beta
waves – tends to occur with a lack of focus or concentration. On
the other hand, as brainwave levels increase toward the higher range
of beta and into the gamma range at over thirty cycles per second, a
higher level of mental focus occurs.
Gamma brainwaves are higher frequency brain waves, and are often
referred to as high-frequency beta waves. Gamma waves predomi-
nate during intense problem solving and focused learning. Gamma
waves cycle at thirty to sixty hertz.
Recent research has determined that gamma waves will be synchro-
nized and coded by phase within the visual cortex. This phase shift-
ing creates a coherence mechanism – a sorting process where
gamma waves with the same phases are segregated and commin-
gled. The resulting sorting process allows the gamma waves to in-
terfere and provide associations of particular thoughts, images or
impressions of sensual information.
High gamma brainwaves cycle from sixty to two hundred hertz, and
have only become obvious to researchers using more sensitive
equipment. These brainwaves are seen during the most intense cog-
nitive functions. The slower waves of theta, delta and alpha tend to
resonate with distinct physical attributes.
The high gamma waves tend to relate to higher states, and tend to
be more diverse in their connection points around the regions of
the central nervous system. In one study of eight subjects, for ex-
ample, high gamma brainwave activity increased during the practice
of pranayama – a method of concentrated meditative breath control
(Vialatte et al. 2008).
Another type of brainwave found by researchers are called ripples.
Ripples are high frequency oscillations that appear to be generated
in the hippocampus. They have been observed oscillating with the
negative portion of slower brainwaves.
79
Ripples appear to transduce through the medial temporal lobe, no-

tably between the hippocampus and the rhinal cortex – a region
associated with the processing of explicit memory recall. Explicit
memory includes active intentional recall during conscious cogni-
tion. In other words, ripples appear to function as informational
waveform ‘bites’ used to access recent, conscious memories and
instructions. They are part of our active information biocommuni-
cation system.
The discovery of ripples augments our position that EEG research
has tended to oversimplify the role of brain waveforms that oscil-
late through the various neurons. The brain’s mapping has focused
on larger regions of the brain. There are still intra-neuronal net-
works that function on a more subtle basis.
For example, a central pivoting exchange factor of the brain’s net-
working system includes the pyramidal neuron networks. Pyramidal
neurons lie within the cortex regions of the brain. Regions more
dense with pyramidal neurons are often collectively referred to as
the neocortex. Here their densities can be as high as 75%.
Researchers have estimated the total number of pyramidal neurons
in the brain to be in the neighborhood of fifteen to twenty billion.
These specialized neurons crystallize and transduce waveform sig-
nals between the cortices and the rest of the central nervous system.
Some of these signals have different frequency attributes. They ap-
pear to transduce through the polar gateway systems of ion chan-
nels. These are not unlike the on-off states of computer machine
code, except there is typically more than one type of on-off state
among each gateway, to allow for feedback loops. Another, more
dimensional description of this transduction is called signal coupling.
This is when multiple waveforms are “coupled” to create a unique
pattern. We might refer to this as a multiple wave interference model.
Research has clocked the brain’s activity at speeds of between
1/1000 and 10/1000 of a second, which would convert to 100-1000
meters/second. As these frequencies relate to the wave nature of
the electrical activity of the brain, they also imply that there is a
80
rhythmic function to the mechanics of the mind. The fact that the
frequency increases as our mind becomes more active indicates that
higher activity exerts a greater wave speed.
Certainly if we consider how instantaneous reactions and thoughts
move around the body, we are talking not only about speed. We are
dealing with a network broadcasting system allowing nearly instan-
taneous communication. This communication system is linear yet
still global: concurrently spreading through the neurons and tissues
into the vast territory of organs, tissues and muscles. This might be
best compared to the network access of a website to billions of
browsers connected on the internet.
These pathways for waveform broadcasting also bridge with the
mind to form complete images. Multiple researchers have con-
firmed that neurons of the visual cortex do not readily pick the full
spectrum of frequencies necessary to form a complete image of
what we perceive.
The ramification of this is significant: We typically assume that what
we perceive is “out there” in the physical domain. We assume that
we are receiving a complete picture. Rather, we are perceiving a
combination of what our senses take in and what our mind extrapo-
lates.
Illustrating this, Russian scientist Dr. Nikolai Bernstein performed
film studies on human perception for several decades in the mid-
twentieth century. His research showed that human movement
could be translated into wave patterns using Fourier calculations.
This is confirmed as we watch television or a movie. When we per-
ceive movement on the TV or movie screen, we are not actually
seeing movement among the screen images. We are merely seeing a
series of still pictures flashed in sequence faster than we can per-
ceive. Between the flashed images is a significant dead space or dark
image. Our minds fill in the blanks and create the illusion of
movement.
The work of neuroscientist Dr. Russell DeValois focused on this
element of visual perception over the past several of decades. His
81
research papers documented how the mind integrates batches of

visual inputs such as color and motion. His years of groundbreaking
research culminated in the 1990 compendium Spatial Vision, co-
authored with his wife Kathleen – also a professor in the subject.
His memorial quoted him describing his lifetime’s work in visual
perception as, “the physiological and anatomical organization underlying
visual perception. In particular, how wavelength information is analyzed and
encoded, the contribution of wavelength and luminance information to spatial
vision, and how spatial information is analyzed and encoded in the visual nerv-
ous system.”
In one study performed by Dr. DeValois at the University of Cali-
fornia at Berkeley, the responses of cats and monkeys were analyzed
while responding to visual checkerboard patterns. Rather than re-
sponding to the patterns themselves, the animals responded to the
interference patterns created by the complementary aspects of the
design – consistent with Fourier-calculated interference waves.
The work of Dr. Fergus Campbell at Cambridge University has
confirmed that the human cerebral cortex picks up particular fre-
quencies and not others. The cerebral component neurons are
‘tuned’ to specific wavelengths and frequencies.
Dr. Pribran also confirmed this in his sometimes-cruel studies on
cats and monkeys. During these tests, it became apparent that com-
binations of waves of particular frequencies were being received,
processed and converted into perceived images as they were com-
bined with internally created waveforms. These internal waveforms
are drawn from memory through a hierarchical cortical mapping
sorting process.
In the 1970s, Dr. Benjamin Libet began researching decision-
making and brain electrical response at the University of California
at San Francisco. His goal was to explore a concept first introduced
by Luder Deeke and Hans Kurnhuber called bereitschafts-potential –
which translates to readiness potential.
In Dr. Libet’s studies, human volunteers hooked up to an electro-
encephalograph were told to perform activities such as button
82
pressing or finger flicking. Dr. Libet’s research compared three

points in time: When the subject consciously made the decision to
press the button; when the button was pressed; and when brain-
waves indicated an instruction from the motor cortex was made
using the EEG. As expected, the conscious decision preceded the
button pushing by an average of about 200 milliseconds (or 150
milliseconds considering a 50 msec margin of error).
Surprisingly, however, the brainwaves associated with the instruc-
tion to press the bottom actually preceded the subject’s conscious
decision to take the action. Stunned by these results, Dr. Libet and
others spent several years confirming the results. Several scientific
articles documented the findings (Libet et al. 1983; Libet 1985).
These results indicated that the action somehow was not originating
from the conscious mind, but must be coming from a deeper
source.
Still, as Dr. Libet wrote in 2003, the gap between the conscious
mind and the physical act gives the conscious mind an ability to
“block or veto the process, resulting in no motor act.” This, Dr. Libet said, is
confirmed by the common experience of consciously blocking
urges incompatible with social acceptability.
In 2004 – more than two decades after his groundbreaking discov-
ery – Dr. Libet proposed a theory based on his and others’ research
in this area. He called this the conscious mental field theory. This theory
proposed that the mind is a sphere of activity bridging the pulsing
of nerve cells with the subjective conscious experience. He de-
scribed this subjective experience as an outgrowth of the various
pulses – a sort of gathering or convergence of various inputs.
A neuron is made up of a cell body with a nucleus, and two types of
nerve fibers that extend outward from the cell body. The fibers
include dendrites, which conduct informational waveforms into the
neural cell body. Axons, on the other hand, project waveforms out-
ward, away from the cell body.
Most neurons have multiple dendrites that spider outward making
several connections. Sensory nerves typically have only one den-
83
drite, however. Sensory nerves are also typically longer – sometimes

measuring up to a meter in length. Dendrites act as receptors. They
are tuned into the pulsed waveform messages that pass from neu-
ron to neuron. They carry this rhythmic information into the neu-
ron cell body where it may be translated or even transmuted before
being conducted or broadcasted. In some cases, the neuron may
simply conduct and amplify the waveform.
In addition to specialized sensory neurons referred to as afferent
nerves, there are also motor neurons, which are usually referred to as
efferent neurons. The efferent or motor neurons are designed to carry
instructional waveforms outward through the central nervous sys-
tem to specific skeletal or organ cells. In these locations, these cells
respond as instructed by the information provided by these wave-
form interference patterns.
We note this because a single waveform does not necessarily con-
tain enough information to drive a complex motor process. It takes
a waveform combination to affect these specialized cells. Some are
stimulated into metabolism responses, secretions, or contractions.
Because they are stimulated by the efferent neurons, these cells are
called effectors.
The inner self ultimately stimulates the effector neurons through
the facilities offered by the neural network. The neural network
generally has three basic types of processes: The first is to receive
and translate afferent sensory waveforms from the senses and envi-
ronment. The second is to project instructional waveform combina-
tions outward through the appropriate neural tracts. The third
process of the neural net is to prioritize, sort and catalog memories
and various autonomic programs.
The brain grows and develops in the body from a tubular canal
called the neural tube. The entire brain is made up of billions of neu-
rons. These are networked into bundles of groupings, which include
nerve tracts, gyri, fissures, sulci and cerebrum lobes. These groupings of
specialized neurons work conjunctively to accomplish specialized
tasks, while transmitting information back and forth through neural
superhighways.
84
The locations of these nerve groupings will be common. Most

nerve functions thus have location plasticity. Plasticity is the ability of
the organism to move or reorganize the location or processes in-
volved in accomplishing particular tasks. In other words, should
one location not be able to function, the organism will relocate the
function to another region of the brain.
How Consciousness Steers the Brain
The inner self steers the neural network through the frontal cortex.
Here the various waveforms provided by the senses and the body’s
feedback are observed by the self. The inner self utilizes the com-
mand center of the prefrontal cortex to respond to these images.
This is located towards the front of the brain, behind and on top of
the forehead.
This prefrontal and frontal cortex region provides the gateway for
the inner self to not only observe the condition of the body and the
environment, but also submit executive orders through the mind in
response. Subsequently, brain researchers have determined that the
frontal lobes are stimulated during the processing of decisions re-
lated to right and wrong, the prioritization of consequences, and
logical thinking. Through the prefrontal region, the self expresses
personality and submits executive orders.
The motor cortex lies just behind the frontal cortex as we comb back
over the head on each side. The motor cortex resides within a band
of neural grey matter (neuron cells) that wrap around the top of the
head on the left and right hemispheres. Here instructions are con-
ducted through the frontal cortex and continue a path towards exe-
cution. Within the motor cortex reside specialized networks of neu-
rons. Each network coordinates with specific types of motor
activity and different aspects of metabolism.
The premotor region contains billions of specialized mirroring neurons,
which reflect and stack the executive decisions transmitted from the
frontal cortex. Behind the premotor cortex is the primary motor cortex.
This region contains specialized neurons able to broadcast specific
signals through the neural network to targeted areas of the body.
85
One group of neurons will submit instructions to the toes, while

another will submit to the feet, and so on. This organized vertical
arrangement of specialized motor neurons is also referred to as the
homunculus motor region, because each neuron group is connected to
different locations around the body.
While most people have similar homunculus mapping systems, use the
same regions, these motor regions of the brain also have a signifi-
cant potential for plasticity. In other words, should one region of
the cortex become damaged or insufficient, another set of neurons
located elsewhere may take over those signaling activities. This indi-
cates that the brain is a flexible tool for the inner self. The person is
not the brain or the mind. The person is the inner operator who is
directing the use of the mind and brain through the facilities offered
by the neural network.
Behind the region of the motor cortex is another brain region called
the sensory cortex. The motor cortex has several individual cortices,
and spreads from the top of the head (parietal lobe) through the back
of the head (occipital lobe) and along the sides (temporal lobe). Among
these lobes lie the visual cortex, the auditory cortex, the olfactory cortex,
the postcentral gyrus, and the gustatory cortex.
In these respective regions, incoming sensory signals are translated
and processed. The first three cortices – the visual, auditory and
olfactory – are the centers that process the signals connected to
seeing, hearing and smelling, respectively.
The postcentral gyrus processes the sensory signals connected to
touch and balance, while the gustatory cortex processes taste signals
from the tongue. Into each sensory cortex, specialized neural tracts
conduct in and blend waveforms from the sense organs. The inter-
ference patterns of these waveforms blend together to provide a
compiled image for the self to observe.
The limbic system is positioned inside these cortex regions, towards
the center of the brain. The limbic system is made up of the thala-
mus, the hypothalamus, the hippocampus, the cingulates, the fomix
and the amygdala.
86
Each of these has a slightly different function, but together they

translate waveform data from the body to observations and memo-
ries for the inner self to perceive. The limbic system’s role is to pri-
oritize and sort this information according to the intentions of the
self.
The hypothalamus and thalamus are the central translation system
for waveforms traveling between the brain and the rest of the body.
They also stimulate endocrine release of hormones and neuro-
transmitters, and translate incoming communications from around
the body.
The cingulates are programmed to govern the autonomic systems
such as the heartbeat, breathing, hunger, and so on. The amygdala,
on the other hand, provides a gateway to the lower neural centers,
channeling the self’s focus upon survival into fear, anger and other
emotions. The hippocampus then sorts and stacks all this informa-
tion for memory storage.
The fomix channels the waveform information from the hippo-
campus through a circuitry of memory processing called the Papex
circuit. Together the limbic system provides a translation and staging
service for waveform information.
We might compare the limbic system to a computer’s operating
system. The software might be stored in a particular location within
the computer. Nevertheless, its programming instructions govern
information translation, assembly, prioritization, storage, and
transmission out to the computer’s peripheral systems.
The brain receives several types of input. The first is called exterocep-
tion, which means information gathered by the five basic senses of
hearing, taste, smell, vision and touch. Interoception is the reception
of signals received by the internal neurons, such as pain and other
feedback responses.
The third reception type is proprioception, which is the internal feed-
back mechanism gauging coordinated movements, balance and
motor efficiency – often referred to as kinesthesia. Meanwhile equi-
librioception is the feedback of motor balance information, which is
87
coordinated with signals passing through the vestibular system.

Nociception is the reception of pain signals that accompany a threat
of damage to tissues or cells.
Finally, thermoception is the sensing of heat or coldness within the
body. Other interoceptions include the sense of time, the esophag-
eal senses and others. A few other sensations have been proposed,
though most could also be considered a subset of interoception.
Each of these types of signals is associated with a particular region
of the brain – though most interact in one respect or another within
the limbic system and its components. For example, proprioception
appears to be stimulated within the cerebellum. Thermoception
seems to propagate from thermoceptor cells in the hypothalamus.
Nociception is thought to be stimulated through the anterior cingu-
lated gyrus (part of the cingulates).
As waveforms are stepped up through neural tracts toward the
brain, they are boosted or converted by neural gateways into wave-
form configurations that can be managed by the limbic system. It is
through the limbic system that various cortex regions are fed in-
teroception from around the body.
Programming sequences drive autonomic responses from the corti-
ces primarily via the limbic system as well. As waveforms travel
through the limbic system, the amygdale – channeling survival con-
cerns of the self – is able to interact and alter these waveforms on
their route to the particular cortex.
This emotional interference system also works in reverse. Even if a
particular decision is being channeled from the motor cortex to
initiate a particular response in the body, the amygdale can alter or
influence that signal, initiated primarily through the hypothalamus-
pituitary pathway.
As it moves back through the limbic system on its way out to
stimulate particular motor nerve centers and endocrine responses,
motor responses may be exaggerated or muted by fear or other
emotional responses directed by the inner self.
88
Research has demonstrated an ion channel-based electrochemical

beta-adrenergic modulation (Strange and Dolan 2006) facility within the
amygdale. This modulation process requires a sophisticated level of
waveform collaboration between the sensual inputs coming from
the cortices and those arising from the mind web.
As mentioned, the amygdale sorts images or impressions to emo-
tional criteria. This provides a stacking of the information by prior-
ity. By pegging information with emotional criteria, greater memory
recall is established – as compared to images without emotional tags
(Dolcos et al. 2006).
This blending and transduction system could be compared to the
internet or worldwide web. The internet or ‘web’ accomplishes a
peer-accepted platform for the convergence of a variety of informa-
tion gateways – or website portals.
The convergence of all these website portals through the internet
platform allows a particular user with a computer to choose to view
any of the information portals. On the internet, the computer op-
erator can choose to view a sorted compilation of websites through
a search engine. The search terms are decided upon by the viewer
and computer operator.
In the case of the mind’s web, the viewer and operator is the inner
self. The gateways are the various pathways for waveform informa-
tion being received and retained by the billions of brain cells. The
limbic system offers to the inner self a platform where these infor-
mation signals can be sorted and compiled.
The inner self uses the sorting facility of the mind to program the
search terms and the priorities for search compilation. Once a
search string is established in acquisition mode, the limbic system
coordinates a search through the various neuron gateways to locate
waveform information with particular specifications.
The hippocampus is a central locator and search center to the
mind’s web. We might compare it to the placement of information
throughout a hard disk, or even the assembly of information by
search engine spiders. Located on each side of the brain, in the
89
temporal lobes, information from the senses and the body are con-
verted by the hippocampus through a complex staging process.
As was first published in a 1957 report by Scoville and Milner and
later confirmed by Squire et al. (1991) along with other researchers,
when the hippocampus becomes damaged, the first symptom is
typically disorientation, memory acquisition loss, and recall defi-
ciency. This is also evidenced in cases of encephalitis, where the
hippocampus does not receive enough oxygen. When the hippo-
campus is damaged, new memories cannot be retained or recalled.
The Papex circuit can be likened to the cochlear passageway that
stages and converts air pressure waves into electromagnetic nerve
pulses. In the hippocampal pathway, waveforms from the cortical
field (entohinal cortex, perihinal cortex, cerebral cortex, and so on), the
subcortical field (amygdale, broca, claustrum, substantia innominata, and
so on) mix with pulses from the thalamus and hypothalamus.
These pulses are channeled through the perforant path consisting of
three regions of the dentate gyrus. The signals pass through the CA3
and CA1 regions and on to the subiculum and parahippocampal gyrus.
Here, between the subiculum and the parahippocampal gyrus, in-
formation in the form of interference waveform patterns is proc-
essed and translated to higher frequency waveforms – and broad-
cast into the neural net for storage or processing. In all, this circuit
vets, tags and prioritizes information, preparing it to be cataloged.
The various regions of the brain located during this search identify
potential storage locations for the information. In this way, the neu-
ral regions of the brain are mapped for information storage and
memory recall.
In the pathway for visual impressions, for example, waveform
combinations of different frequencies strike the retina and pass
through the LGM to the visual cortex.
Here in the cortex, waveforms drawn from memory through the
amygdale are combined with internal stimuli waveforms and LGM
waveform data to create waveform interference patterns. These
90
interference patterns create the specific information images for the

self to observe.
We might compare this with creating an image by blending pixels of
different colors onto a dark screen. This is the technology com-
puters use to display graphics. Alone each pixel does not create
much of an image, but together the pixels can create a complete
image on the screen.
The images the inner self observes within the cortex are thus altered
by context and history. The waveforms from the amygdale and
memory alter the interference patterns. This accounts for the ex-
pression that we ‘see what we want to see.’
The interference patterns from these different sources eventually
deliver convincing impressions to the hippocampus. Because the
cortex combines all these waveforms together, the waveform in-
formation is forever altered. This creates the reality that each of us
perceives a slightly different picture of the world around us.
In order to attempt to ‘standardize’ our perception, the inner self
will seek confirmation from others in the physical world. Informa-
tion is thus gathered through conversation and the different forms
of media. This creates a feedback loop between the amygdale, the
hippocampus, and the cortices to constantly adjust our perception
of reality towards the apparent perception of others.
This is an intentional process because the inner self is constantly
seeking affirmation from others in a never-ending quest for love
and acceptance.
Mapped brain regions also sort and translate incoming waveforms
from the hippocampus. These are ultimately governed and coordi-
nated by the prefrontal cortex. The intentions of the inner self
stimulate a form of waveform programming that modulates neuron
channels for particular response. This creates a sorting system
among those programmed neurons.
The ion channel gateway states and neurotransmitter fluid content
around the neuron are manipulated by the executive initiatives pro-
91
grammed by the mind – driven by the intentions of the self. Many

pre-programmed responses are crystallized within our static DNA.
Still, neurons accommodate the executive authority of the inner self,
expressed and translated through the prefrontal cortex and com-
municated via neural pathways.
Within the limbic system, waveforms from all over the body are
converged and translated together with remodeled waves from the
sensory cortices and the various feedback centers throughout the
body. After translation, the limbic system coordinates the instruc-
tions sent out to the body.
These are mirrored by the broadcasting of reflective signals back to
the frontal cortex for executive review. Should the self respond to
these inputs, executive signals are again fed back to the body
through the limbic system and the motor cortex.
Here again the limbic system is acting as a transfer station, stimulat-
ing the release of various hormones through the hypothalamus and
pituitary gland. These hormones cascade through the various glands
of the endocrine system.
This system provides the feedback pathways for executive instruc-
tion that Dr. Libet’s research illustrated. The sum of the process
allows conscious processing of input and feedback through nerve
systems pre-programmed by the mind.
Ultimately, it is the inner self – utilizing the various equipment of
the brain – who initiates executive action. Once converted through
the prefrontal and frontal cortices, this is accomplished directly
through executive stimulation of the motor cortex and limbic sys-
tem. This is like a car driver who sets up the proper cruise control
speed, then removes his foot from the gas pedal. The cruise control
will maintain the speed of the car by accelerating up hills and decel-
erating down hills automatically. However, should the driver decide
to change speeds, avert running into the car ahead, or even stop the
car, the driver can immediately take over the gas pedal and control
the car’s speed directly.
92
In the same way, the self is driving the vehicle of the body through
both autonomic programming and executive control. Most auto-
nomic functions can be manipulated directly should the self con-
sciously intend to change them. In some cases, this takes practice,
as biofeedback research illustrates.
This conscious insertion of executive command can be initiated
even during an autonomic response, just as the car driver can hit
the gas pedal at any time to change the car’s speed while it is run-
ning on cruise control.
As waveform messages from sensory nerves combine with physiol-
ogy feedback and enter the brain’s mapping network through the
limbic system, they can be observed by the self on the interference
‘screens’ of a particular cortex or a combination of cortices. (The
self can also manipulate, prioritize and distort these incoming
physiological waveforms through the amygdale, however.)
As they blend in the cortex, the self is able to review the waveforms
and if need be, respond with intention. By this time, however, the
programming already in place to process the particular situation is
also ready to respond.
Should a conscious ‘executive’ decision be made by the inner self,
instructional waveforms are initiated through the prefrontal cortex.
These are channeled through the motor cortex, which formats the
waveforms for the hypothalamus. The hypothalamus in turn trans-
duces these waveforms into physical response through the endo-
crine system and central nervous system. These instructional mes-
sengers may also contain a stop order to override whatever other
instructions may already be in place.
Autonomic responses are established through initialized intentions
and a subsequent programming of key web hubs by the mind. Most
of these intentions are related to the survival of the body, translated
from the self’s fear of dying.
This fear becomes translated into various scenarios that stimulate
the programming features of mind. The programming waveforms
stimulated by the mind are stored in neurons just as memories are,
93
in the form of standing waves, crystallized by ionic molecular polar-

ity and bonding sequences. Some autonomic programs are more
permanently ‘wired’ into the standing waveforms that make up
DNA bonds. These ‘hard-wired’ programs ultimately are passed on
to the body’s successors through the DNA.
These ‘coded’ standing waveforms with neurons are activated by
certain types of waveforms incoming through sensory nerves and
from interoception translated through the hypothalamus and thala-
mus. As information moves through this network, the neural pro-
gramming indirectly relays the self’s ultimate intentions of keeping
the body alive with specific autonomic responses.
The information will also be stepped up to the mind’s web for
viewing through the cortices. When we burn our finger, our auto-
nomic programming will immediately respond by pulling the hand
away. The self will also be able to view the incoming information
separately, and initiate a separate, conscious response, such as tend-
ing to the injury or turning off the flame.
The inner self’s recognition of information within the frontal cortex
(or mind screen) is called cognition. In humans and primates, the central
interface or bridge between the incoming impulse pathways of the
nervous system and executive control is located in the dorsolateral
prefrontal cortex (Otani 2002).
It is here waveforms are examined, responded to and their re-
sponses relayed onto the motor cortex. Simultaneously, goal-
directed intentions from the self stimulate the broadcast of wave-
form messages back into the neural net through the frontal cortex.
Instructive waveforms are simultaneously pulsed through the hypo-
thalamus, the specific regions of the motor cortex, and then broad-
cast throughout the nervous system.
These instructive waveforms together stimulate the various elemen-
tal channels to respond. In other words, the body is not shocked or
jerked into motion solely from pulses moving out from the brain.
There are several pathways of activity initiated during a full-body
response. The body’s endocrine systems are stimulated. The body’s
94
heat-producing centers are stimulated. The body’s insulin and en-

ergy releasing centers are stimulated. The body’s pacemaker, vaso-
motor, perfusive and respiratory functions all are simultaneously
stimulated into immediate response. How else could the body react
so instantaneously and thoroughly from head to toe following an
intentional decision? We certainly have to characterize the chemical
binding process as too cumbersome to exclusively provide these
broadcasting mechanisms.
The connection between the cognitive functions of higher decision-
making and the mind screen web are illustrated by the size of the
frontal lobe cortex areas of the brain in more evolved organisms.
Behavioral studies with animals and humans have also confirmed
that complex executive functions with goal-directed behavior, lan-
guage and higher cognition in general is associated with a larger,
more developed prefrontal cortex (Fuster 2002).
The developed frontal lobe cortex enables the self to command a
greater volume of switchboard control and the ability to specify
intention through a complex mental web. We also note that all
highly evolved organisms have advanced backbones and high-
energy entry-points to carry out full-body neural responses. As for
less evolved organisms, we still find key neural regions that trans-
duce conscious intentions, albeit with less complexly.
The Subtle Steering Wheel
During the 1970s, Dr. Stewart Hameroff from the University of
Arizona, and Dr. Kunio Yasue and Dr. Mari Jibu from the Oka-
yama University began researching the pathways for conscious ac-
tivity between neural cells. One of the mysteries they probed in
independent research was how anesthesia agents such as chloro-
form and nitrous oxide could disable the consciousness of a patient.
Through their respective research, they independently discovered
that conscious activity within the body had to do with a curious
matrix of twisted spiral filaments they called tubulins. These tubulins
are arranged into networked pathways that wind through the neural
cells in three-dimensional protein spirals called microtubules. These
95
microtubules appear to be conducting tracts for waveform activity.

The research illustrated that the microtubules make up a previously
unseen network for subtle waveform biocommunication through
the neural dendtritic web (Hameroff 1974; Hameroff 1982; Hameroff
et al. 1984; Hameroff 1987; Hameroff and Penrose 1996, Hameroff
2010).
As the larger waveforms of the physical realm are processed and
transmitted through dendrites, they conduct through the neuro-
transmitters between the synapses. As they are conducted through
this medium, the waveforms meet with other waveforms traveling
within the neural network. This convergence creates coherent inter-
ference patterns.
The resonating results of these interference patterns are then
transmitted through the subtle network of the microtubules. In this
state, these subtle waveforms are ‘stepped up’ to a higher frequency
format. These subtle high frequency waveforms in turn create holo-
graphic wave patterns, which are ultimately reflected (or mirrored)
onto the ‘screens’ of the cortices. Once on the screens, these holo-
grams interact with others to create a ‘picture’ of the physical body
and the world around us. The inner self interacts with these cortices
through the primary screening device of the frontal cortex to view
this holographic picture.
Within these microtubules also travel the various subtle waveforms
that conduct the intentions of the self through the body. The dis-
covery of these microtubule pathways confirms much of the ancient
wisdom of the chakras, nadis and meridians. These channels were also
described as being pathways for living energy flow. We might con-
sider nerve tracts as pathways of lower-frequency reflexive wave-
forms, while the microtubules broadcast higher-frequency, complex
information waves.
We might compare the microtubular process of projecting wave
interference patterns onto the mind to the recording of a musical
composition in a modern studio. The studio producer will record
the guitar onto one track, the piano onto another track, the drums
onto another and the voice onto another track.
96
The producer may even overlay background singers’ voices onto

other tracks. The producer will then assemble all the tracks together
at particular sound levels to form the entire piece of music. This is
often referred to as a composition. Each track makes up a piece of the
total song. To listen to each track alone without the other tracks will
sound weird. In much the same way, the mind captures the various
waveform frequencies coming through the microtubular network,
neural net and biochemical messengers – combining them to form
unified images of the outside world.
This is the same principle as holography. One of the basic tenets of
holography is that each part mirrors the entire image. This is ac-
complished through a splitting of waves as they interfere, creating a
multitude of waves, each containing all the information via the
composition of waveforms.
Using waveform interference, the mind orchestrates holographic
assembly in both directions. The mind reflects images semicon-
ducted through particular neurons. The mind also stimulates effec-
tor neurons to act reflectively, using the pre-programming initiated
by the intentions of the self.
The mindscreen projects combined images using the various cortex
images – each from assembled waveforms from different locations.
This collection of images is broadcast through crystallized neuron
pathways. Each neuron is constructed with the appropriate crystal
DNA structure, ion channel system and microtubules, giving it the
ability to join with others to relay multiple waveform interference
patterns simultaneously.
Conscious Memory
Modern neuroscience divides memory into short-term and long-
term processes. Long-term memory is further divided into three
types: Episodic – when memories are unique to the time and place;
semantic – when memories involve concepts or learning; and proce-
dural – when memories revolve around skills. Episodic memories
relate to events that happened in the past, or people we knew from
the past. Semantic memories relate more to concept understanding.
97
Procedural memories relate to remembering how to ride a bike,

write or use a telephone.
Interestingly, memory loss of one type will not typically accompany
the loss of another type. Thus in many amnesia cases, long-term
memory may appear erased while short-term memory is retained.
The person may forget older events yet continue to remember what
just happened.
Furthermore, all too frequently one type of long-term memory may
be lost while another type is retained. For example, a person may
suffer the loss of their episodic memory – forgetting their name,
family, school history, phone number, birth date and other personal
details. They might also forget events of the past. At the same time,
they may remember how to write, drive, talk on the phone and even
retain concepts such as how financial markets work.
Often a particular trauma or event may cause the forgetfulness of
either what happened just before the event, or what happened just
after the event. The former case is referred to as retrograde amnesia –
a loss of memory just prior to a trauma. The latter is referred to as
anterograde amnesia – a loss of memory just after a trauma. Both may
also occur. The causes of these types of forgetfulness are consid-
ered quite mysterious. This is because memory has been miscalcu-
lated.
There are other types of memory loss. Many are unconnected to
any particular event, while others follow injury to particular brain
regions or involve trauma. Trauma-associated amnesia may or may
not involve physical injury. It may follow a head injury or automo-
bile accident. Traumatic amnesia may also follow the witnessing of
a traumatic event, or may involve abuse. Rape is an example of
traumatic amnesia involving abuse. Psychogenic or dissociative fugue is
another type of memory loss, which also may occur following a
trauma, and may result in a person identifying him- or herself as
someone else, or even taking an unexpected trip to a place previ-
ously unknown. Other events that can cause memory loss include
alcohol and drug related blackouts, and Wernicke-Korsakoff’s, which is
thought to be caused by thiamin deficiency.
98
A more common type of amnesia involves the loss of memory of a

particular event. This may be the forgetting of certain childhood
events, for example. Forgetting certain events may also be related to
traumatic memory loss. Many of us forget events in the distant past
that were not necessarily traumatic as well. It is not unusual for us
to forget our younger childhood events. We also may recall some-
thing without remembering how we knew it – called source amnesia.
One illness overwhelming modern medicine and capturing research
attention is Alzheimer’s disease. The first documented case of AD was
discovered by a Bavarian psychiatrist named Dr. Alois Alzheimer.
Dr. Alzheimer treated a 51-year old patient who suffered from
memory loss and hallucinations. The patient, “Auguste D” was
frequently delirious and had extreme short-term memory deficit.
She complained of having “lost myself.”
She was committed to the Frankfurt asylum in 1901 and died five
years later. Autopsy revealed a sticky plaque among brain cells and
nerve tissue entanglement. The disease was named after the diagno-
sis given by Dr. Alzheimer, and this variant of dementia became
associated with physical damage to the brain apparently relating to a
build-up of beta amyloid plaque among neurons.
The definite cause of AD has not been determined, although there
appear to be a number of potential contributing factors. These in-
clude stress, free radical damage, heavy metal toxicity, and poor
nutrition. Recent research seems to point at a lack of phosphatidyl-
serine among brain cell membranes as well.
This sort of research contributes to our notion that memory is
chemical-based. Meanwhile, EGG and magnetic resonance scans
locate the seeming position for long-term memory storage location
within the frontal and medial temporal lobes.
However, researchers have also found that – like motor function –
memory storage has a high degree of plasticity. Research has dis-
closed numerous instances where memories are moved to different
regions of the brain. This has especially been found in situations of
stroke or other brain damage.
99
The plasticity of memory is also evident following hemicortication

surgeries – a frequent treatment of childhood epilepsy for many
years. Episodic memories were retained even through the brain
regions known to retain episodic memories were removed. We must
therefore question the assumption that memories are specific to
particular neurons.
Yet we still need to address the fact that many memory losses occur
following brain damage. So are memories physical or not?
The first clue is that most of these cases are specific to short-term
memory loss. Long-term memories remain a mystery. In one study
(Piolino et al. 2006), thirteen patients with early stage dementia, ten
patients with semantic dementia and fifteen patients with fronto-
temporal dementia were compared to assess the connection be-
tween memory loss and damage to the medial temporal lobe. One
of the central areas of focus in this study was the autobiographical
amnesia of episodic memories, or the lack of ability to acquire or remem-
ber past events.
The results of this study concluded no consistency between mem-
ory loss and frontal lobe impairment. In some cases, short-term
memories were difficult to acquire as a whole, and in other cases,
the memory acquisition depended upon the details and importance
of the event. In many cases, long-term “remote” memories were
retained and preserved, while short-term details and events were
not.
This led the study authors to support a newer theory called the mul-
tiple trace theory, which says that memory acquisition occurs through
more than one physical mechanism, and can be stored in multiple
locations in the brain.
In a similar study (Matuszewski et al. 2006) on autobiographical
episodic memory loss among frontotemporal dementia patients,
near learning abilities with semantic memories revealed a shifting
executive function with multiple processes. As for other possible
models of memory acquisition, several studies have indicated that
100
the hippocampus complex was significantly involved in the storage

and recall of recent memories, but not for older memories.
Other research has offered evidence that the hippocampus complex
is responsible for autobiographical episodic memory and special
memory, but the storage of other types of memory was shifted to
other locations (Nadel and Moscovitch 1997).
In a 2002 report (Nester et al.) published in Neuropsychologia on auto-
biographical memories among semantic dementia patients, the pres-
ervation of recent memories and the loss of remote memories sup-
ported the trace theory of memory retention and acquisition. This
report confirms, as so many cruel animal studies have, that memo-
ries are not chemically retained within specific neurons.
Thus, we can logically compare memories to data stored on a com-
puter’s hard drive. Modern science has yet to fathom the processes
that must fall in place to stack, sort and assemble memory informa-
tion into electromagnetic neuron storage locations, however.
This stems primarily from the fact that modern science does not
understand the most basic fundamental of biology: the driver organ-
ism. We must understand the source of operation first. Then we
can functionally understand the organism’s operation. Just as a car
needs a driver to operate. Once we realize the role of the driver of
the car, we can see how the driver uses the wheel, the clutch and
the gas pedal to move the car.
The driver of the body utilizes particular equipment to drive the
body. The brain is like the instrument panel, and the mind is like the
software driving the instrument panel. Like the driver of the car, the
inner self dictates the functioning of the body. Rather than an in-
strument panel, steering wheel, gas pedal and brake system, the self
uses the mind, the prefrontal cortex, motor cortex and limbic sys-
tem to execute commands to the body.
This was exposed in a study of memory-challenged patients with
different brain disorders (Thomas-Anterion 2000). Twelve Alz-
heimer’s disease patients and twelve frontotemporal dementia pa-
tients with functionally similar semantic memory, logical memory
101
and retrograde memory test scores were studied for antegrade ver-
bal memory and frontal lobe activity.
Despite similar memory acquisition scores and types of memory
loss, physiological brain function occurred in different locations
among the subjects. This illustrated flexibility in brain region utiliza-
tion, quite similar to practical daily living: Should we be unable to
pick up something with one hand, we will quickly adjust and pick
up the item with the other hand. In the same way, the self, using the
utility of the mind, can often accomplish the same purpose using
different neurons, cortices and/or limbic components.
This doesn’t contradict the notion that should the brain’s neurons
be struck with a debilitating disease or injury, the inner self may not
be able to utilize the instruments of the brain to recall and retain
memories. Memory is in fact a handshaking process between the
mind’s programming, the sensory system, the hippocampus com-
plex, the various cortices, and the inner self.
Indeed, memory can be retained using a variety of physical mecha-
nisms. Humans have utilized various physical tools besides brain
cells to replace or augment memory function for thousands of
years. A person may retain memories using a diary to assist in the
recall of particular thoughts, emotions and events. Projects or ob-
jectives may be recorded onto daily planners, electronic smart-
phones, or digital voice recorders for later recall. Most students and
businesspeople carry notebooks to every class or meeting to assist
with the retention and recall of lectures and discussions. These ex-
ternal memory devices replace or augment limited memorization
functions. They also illustrate the inner self’s intention to remem-
ber.
The memory experiments by Dr. Wilder Penfield at the Montreal
Neurological Institute in the 1970s clearly illustrated that memories
typically accompanied emotions and intentions. When Dr. Pen-
field’s weak electrical currents excited locations within the brain, the
subject would recall historical facts associated with past experiences.
Their recollections included songs connected to feelings from the
past, aromas connected to experiences, people connected to per-
102
sonal relationships, and events connected to other emotional

events.
Dry information such as what score a person received twenty years
ago on a test or sporting event might seem like raw data, but this
data can be connected to personal intentions to win or receive a
good score. Without an emotional, intentional attachment, the abil-
ity to recall that event subsides as the self’s intention to remember it
weakens.
What this tells us is that memory is impossible without emotional
intention or consciousness. Memory studies have shown that when
a person is emotionally involved in a particular incident or detail,
the recall rate of that incident or detail is significantly higher.
Furthermore, as the event converts to longer-term memory, if it has
no emotional attachment, it is typically sorted out during our con-
solidation process – which typically takes place as we sleep. In order
to remember trivial details, those subjects who connect the detail to
a colorful, emotional or funny association will dramatically increase
the likelihood of recalling it later.
Without consciousness there would be no need for memory or re-
call. We might think that a robot must have a memory in order to
store its programming information. However, no robot would be
built without the original intention produced by consciousness.
Without consciousness, there would be no purpose for a robot. The
robot, then, is simply a surrogate of a conscious person’s purpose
and intention. This is precisely what the physical body is.
We can logically conclude that the inner self utilizes the physical
elements of the brain for memory retention and recall, but only by
utilizing the programming of the mind. This also means that dam-
age to the brain’s hardware may also destroy the organism’s ability
to mentally recall and apply those memories. Memorization and
recall may be shifted to a variety of brain regions and even external
tools. Some hardware is still necessary, however. This is because
physical information is perceived through interference patterns of
103
electromagnetic waveforms. These interference patterns become

crystallized within groups of resonating neurons.
This information will not be retrievable without conscious inten-
tion. Should those brain cells become damaged, those memories
may become difficult to retrieve, but not impossible. The self could
still retrieve them through investigating other physical evidence
such as a photo album.
Memory retrieval is interrupted by broken links between the inner
self and those interference patterns. The standing waveforms may
still be crystallized within the neurons. Or the neurons may be dam-
aged. Then they will not be able to retain the crystallized waveform
patterns. These two possibilities are also associated: A broken link
can precipitate from unused neurons and damage to the neurons.
We can compare memory and neurons to wind and sailboat sails. If
the sail rips, the boat will not be able to ride the wind. The wind
may be blowing, but since the sail is ripped, the sail cannot catch
the wind and drive the boat.
As to whether the forgetfulness associated with dementia or Alz-
heimer’s disease indicates that the inner self chooses to forget: This
can be a cruel supposition to those family and friends surrounding
the dementia patient. Certainly the dementia patient may not have
chosen specifically to forget their family and friends.
At the same time, we must recognize that there are deeper issues
involved. The inner self may be dealing with a deep desire to escape
the trivial requirements and responsibilities brought on by their
family and friends. This may be something they have not dealt with
directly in their life. They may not have drawn the appropriate
boundaries, and/or have shouldered more than they are comfort-
able with. So the physical consequence that resolves the need to
draw boundaries is to shut off those connections and responsibili-
ties.
There may also be a natural desire to be finished with the pettiness
of this world. The inner self may be withdrawing gradually as a mat-
ter of natural course. They may have been subjected to the life-
104
saving therapies of modern care, and their physical body may well
be outliving the inner self’s natural time of death. This “internal
clock” of time within the body is upset by modern technology.
For example, a stroke has the potential to shut off circulation to the
brain. Under natural conditions, this would be fatal. In a modern
hospital trauma center, however, physicians can often clear the
blockage of the blood vessel to the brain with stents, micro-
balloons and other methods. The result is an extension of the per-
son’s life beyond the naturally-appointed time of death.
The natural result of a stroke leads to the potential for brain cells to
undergo damage due to their having a lack of blood flow. Ordinar-
ily, this should cause death.
The continued survival of the body as a result of the trauma cen-
ter’s efforts may also lead to a loss of brain activity. Instead of natu-
rally resulting in death, the inner self is stuck inside a body with
damaged brain cells.
The inner self may also respond to a personal trauma that has
shocked the self into withdrawing. This may be related to the loss
of a spouse or another loved one’s physical body. This may prompt
the inner self to question why the other person left them behind.
Why are they being left alone?
This emotional trauma, perhaps combined with brain neuron dam-
age, can easily lead to the withdrawal of the inner self from family
members and certain types of memories.
In other words, our memories are directly linked to our conscious-
ness. What do we want to remember? We might very well remem-
ber things we want to remember, but gradually, our minds orches-
trate the neuron storage in such a way as to forget the things we
prefer to forget, and remember the things we either consciously or
subconsciously want to remember.
The relationship between visual pictures, imagination and memory
are linked to the context of the inner self as the intentional viewer.
The inner self programs the mind’s reflective imagery. The holo-
105
graphic pictures reflected onto the mindscreen are constructed by a

combination of retinal cells, the optic nerve, the LGM, neurons
from the visual cortex, together with the intentions of the inner self.
We might refer to this process as focus. Through conscious intent,
the self can also stimulate the mind to construct pictures using only
previously-captured and internalized images. We can aptly refer to
this as imagination. Through a combination of focus and imagination,
intentional pictures are constructed within the mind.
When attached to an intentional picture or image, incoming infor-
mation can be sorted and stored onto to the neural net. When we
connect information with images – including any sensual input such
as sound or touch – we are effectively multiplying the number of
references within that data.
We might compare this with how search engine spiders prioritize
web pages. The spiders will travel the net and count the cross refer-
encing of websites to determine a ranking of popularity between
websites. In the same way, the mind’s programming prioritizes im-
ages by the number of links to the interests of the inner self. In
other words, the self instructs the mind to prioritize memories by
interest: The more intentional screenings each image has, the higher
its priority ranking. The higher its priority ranking, the more avail-
able the mind makes that memory.
As a result, our retrievable memories of the past are usually con-
nected to experiences that affected the inner self somehow. This
means they had emotional effects upon the inner self. Once the self
has attached an emotional experience to an image, the sense percep-
tion or image is indelibly attached to that emotion.
These attached sense perceptions have now become impressions. By
attaching the inner self’s objectives (emotions) to sounds, smells,
touch, or visual images, we are effectively cataloging the perception
with the prioritization of that emotion. The more important the
emotion, the higher the perception ranks in memory.
An example of this emotional attachment is how a song will recon-
nect us back to a precise time and place of our chronological past.
106
Because the original hearing of the song became attached to the

emotions of the inner self, the hearing of the song later will stimu-
late the recall of vivid memories of those times. These may include
details otherwise long forgotten.
This can work with pictures just as well. We may see a particular
picture and be reminded of the time, place and details surrounding
the moment when that picture was taken. The images in the picture
stimulated the retrieval of the emotions just as the song did in the
previous example.
Why does the memory work better when connected to emotional
attachments? What is it about a picture, song, or funny story from
our past that enables us to retrieve vivid memories?
Remember that information travels through the neural network
through varying waveforms that interact to become combined im-
ages or information. This combination could be compared to
throwing several stones into a small pond. Each ripple created by a
stone is connected to the weight and size of the stone itself. As the
different ripples from the different stones collide, they create an
interaction of multiple waves. This interaction of ripples creates a
rich multi-layered view of the history of the stone throws. An ob-
server of the interactive rippling could assess a total picture of what
kinds of stones were dropped into the pond.
This is analogous to how a television screen converts various col-
ors, forms, and sounds onto the viewing screen to image an original
broadcast. As various radio wave signals are received by the antenna
or cable input, they are flashed interactively upon the screen. It is
this interaction that creates the whole picture. The individual radio
waves by themselves would not communicate much. It is their in-
teractivity with the polarity of the screen that renders them under-
standable.
In other words, outside the physical brain’s issues and the back-
and-forth process of checking and crosschecking between the mind
and the neural network lies the conscious intent of the self. The self
drives the process of the mind’s information processing software.
107
The self also ultimately drives the extent of the memory saved and
retrieved.
While we can typically remember many interesting things about our
life and retrieve them quite easily without much effort, we have to
make a conscious effort to remember details that are less important
to us. If we want to remember details taught in a science class for
example, we have to make a concerted effort to repeatedly focus on
the information in order to retain them and repeat them later.
Simply listening to the lecture and hearing the information once
typically does not allow the attachment and recall of massive
amounts of unimportant details onto the mind’s memory web. We
might want good grades, but we may not be interested in the infor-
mation itself.
We do not have any emotional attachment to it. We will have to
listen to it, read about it, write it down and then maybe read about it
again in hopes that we will somehow connect enough emotion to
the information to remember it. If we are able to utilize some of the
methods mentioned above – relating the details to unique pictures
and funny stories – our ability to remember these details will be
better. The remembrance is occurring because the self is connecting
emotional intention to the information.
For this same reason, we tend to better remember details about the
things that interest us the most. For example, we often see men and
boys able to remember the batting averages of their favorite base-
ball players. Yet they are unable to remember the latest economic
statistics – even though they saw both on the same television news
show. Here the details of intended hobbies and personal missions
are placed in a higher priority. We have focused greater intention
upon the details we remembered.
This is illustrated by a study published in 2005 (Lindstrom et al.)
concluding that a positive relationship existed between acquiring
later-in-life Alzheimer’s disease and increased television viewing
among middle-aged adults. 135 elderly Alzheimer’s cases and 331
healthy (control) subjects were interviewed and classified for televi-
108
sion viewing duration during their mid-life years. The results found
that for each hour per day of mid-life television viewing, Alz-
heimer’s occurrence increased 1.3 times. Conversely, intellectually
stimulating activities and social activities were associated with lower
Alzheimer’s rates. The study’s authors concluded that social en-
gagement with others somehow better utilized the neurons at risk
of dementia-related disorders.
While watching television, the self’s focus becomes increasingly tied
to the virtual illusions of the tele-scripted drama, as opposed to the
variegated living world around us. These adults presumably reach
for their escape from the world by watching television because they
prefer to unfocus their attention on the living world. (This assumes
fictional dramas – not news and documentary programs reflecting
reality.) The living world provides too many problems or difficulties
to solve.
Conversely, social activities engage the self’s attention onto the real
lives and problems of the world. This requires further emotional
involvement from the self. Life requires us to prioritize the mass of
incoming information. This stresses the neural mechanisms – keep-
ing them better exercised.
The real world also stimulates the self to utilize the tools of the
mind to solve the problems of the physical world. Many studies
have confirmed that mental exercises and problem solving create
better cognition and a more resilient memory.
In the case of television watchers, the self’s lack of focus and work
on real world problems leads to a slow degeneration of biocommu-
nication pathways. Like unused muscles, the neurons are under-
utilized. They receive less circulation, less detoxification, less inter-
action and less activity. This all leads to the slow degeneration of
those cells, opening them up to accumulating ameloid beta plaque
or a myriad of brain-stifling developments.
In the final analysis, it is the propensity of the inner self to escape
from reality that under-utilizes the brain’s biocommunication
equipment. Does this mean the self wills or intends the Alzheimer’s
109
scenario? Not directly, but just as a sedentary lifestyle perpetuates

obesity and an inability to adequately move and exercise, the pro-
pensity to escape certain physical realities perpetuates a progressive
inability to utilize certain regions of the brain.
It has long been held by sleep researchers – who have measured the
brain’s electrical activity during sleep – that the higher electrical
activity from individual brain neurons indicates that during sleep the
neurons are reassembling and sorting information received during
the day. The neurons are processing this information into long-term
memory. This is referred to as consolidation. This theory has recently
been challenged by memory researchers who have noticed that the
limbic system and interference processes appear to be the focal
point of the higher electrical activity. As Dr. John Wixted, professor
of Psychology at the University of California at San Diego proposed
in 2005, the evidence seems to point to interference mechanics cre-
ated by waking and sleeping activities. The process of sleep appar-
ently provokes priorities or images that interfere with the consolida-
tion process of memories.
We would contend this is caused by those initial memories not be-
ing highly prioritized by the intentions of the self. For this reason,
not all the recent memory is eliminated during sleep. The memories
considered more critical to the self are retained. Otherwise, how
could we remember those things we consider dear (beyond a day)
and forget the other details?
Where do the memory waveform interference patterns go as our
intentions distance them? Where do the waveforms not imaged by
the mind go? Do they still exist somewhere?
The conscious mind is a mapping and screening mechanism driven
by the self. It is conscious because it is driven by consciousness.
The self, however, is of another nature: The self is composed of con-
sciousness. Waveform interference patterns continue to exist in the
larger realm of consciousness. However, the bridle of misidentifica-
tion confines the self to those interference patterns intentionally
collected and translated by the limbic system, and projected by the
mind. The brain and mind are simply tools for intention.
110
This might be comparable to a person going to a lecture and choos-

ing to write down notes on the lecture, even though the person
could certainly just listen to the lecture and remember the interest-
ing parts of the lecture.
The uninteresting data will likely remain outside the memory web
because the self is not interested in it. The notes, on the other hand,
will be available to the self because of the intentions of the self to
pass the class.
This also means that the mind mechanism is limited by and focused
onto the intentions of the self. Therefore, the mind will sometimes
alter or ignore inputs that do not fit with the intentions of the self.
As a result, the self will not want to maintain a memory that might
conflict with its attempts to enjoy the physical world. Most traumas
are erased from the “conscious” awareness of the mind simply be-
cause the self does not want to face those painful experiences.
However, if the inner self does not learn and grow from the experi-
ence, the self cannot release its focus upon the trauma. As a result,
the waveform interference patterns of the trauma event continue to
be linked to the emotions of the self – which forces the memory to
be retained and linked to those emotions.
Linked with these emotions, the memory is prioritized near the top
of the standing wave hierarchy, forcing the self to continue to see
the images of that memory until it is resolved.
Again, it is only when the trauma has been resolved by the self that
the emotion can be removed from the memory. When the emo-
tional link is removed from the memory, it becomes a worthless
detail to the self, and the mind eventually consolidates it and depri-
oritizes it. Over time, this reprioritization routine of the mind’s pro-
gramming releases the details, and the memory is gradually down-
graded within the memory net.
The question becomes; how does the self resolve the trauma? This
is accomplished through growth and learning. The self must deter-
mine why the event happened. The self must forgive the person
111
who we might be holding responsible. The self must come to an

understanding regarding the event and the people involved.
The self must learn from the event what was supposed to be
learned. As soon as this takes place, the self can detach from the
event and move on. This is often communicated by the expression:
“What do I need to learn from this experience?” If we do not know, we
will probably continue to hold onto it.
Reprioritization or consolidation does not eliminate the event. It
still exists in waveform interference pattern form. However, ones
mental memory of an event is inseparable from intent. As long as
there is intent to remember it – or an emotion connected to it – the
waveform will be accessible. This might be compared again to the
internet. While so many websites might be out there – some even
communicating hatred or violence – we choose to only surf the
websites we are interested in. We will ignore those others, and even
though they may still be there and possibly even accessible, the web
surfer will probably not even be aware of their existence.
On the other hand, should we not learn and grow from a trauma,
we may instead seek to escape from it. This can lead to drug and
alcohol abuse, and other strategies of escape. It can also lead to the
slow progression of dementia.
It is apparent that the self has the ability to be selective in terms of
memory. The self has the ability to choose its viewing priorities.
Reflecting this, the limbic system’s memory sorting facilities can
also be directed with selectivity. This is why we remember interest-
ing things more than boring things. This is also why we can forget
traumatic events during childhood while remembering all too clearly
the traumatic events that unfolded during adolescence or adult-
hood.
During times of childhood trauma, the inner self can more easily
disconnect from the event. This ease of disconnection helps the
memory fade. A trauma occurring later in life will have a lot more
emotional attachment than a trauma occurring during youth. For
112
this reason, it is clinically more difficult to resolve traumas that oc-

cur after 5-7 years of age.
We might also consider how children can run around laughing and
playing, and when they fall – especially if they are playing a game
they enjoy – they may simply jump up and keep playing. They may
hardly notice the scrapes and scratches – or the pain – of the
trauma. The child may even avoid Mom’s first aid application –
intended to avoid infection and speed healing. In the child’s eyes,
this might just interfere with the remainder of the game.
It is likely this child will completely forget this trauma as he or she
quickly learns not to repeat the fall. Should an adult have such a fall
there would likely be significantly more trauma. An adult will likely
become embarrassed for such a fall. This would be combined with
an increased focus on the ramifications of the fall: Will it get in-
fected? Will the knee be injured for long? Will the fall cause any
major disabilities? As the adult’s mind plays out all the emotional
fears of the self within, the fall soon becomes embedded into
long(er) term memory storage.
This type of focus also contributes to our ability to remember one
person’s name while forgetting another’s. It is not that the person
whose name we forgot did not interest us: Their name simply did
not capture our emotional focus at the moment. Our mind was
engaged in processing other items that took priority over the name.
The mind is the programming tool of the inner self, and though it
might seem a bit out of control at times, its sub-routines directly or
indirectly respond to the interests of the self. Should we exert a
determined effort to remember names, however, it would be an-
other story. We would likely employ various mnemonic tools such as
creating a funny picture to associate with the person’s name. These
intentional insertions are stimulated by the self, but are executed
through the amygdala.
Once the mind creates that funny picture, it is inserted by the
amygdala into the limbic system, which exchanges a holographic
image with the frontal cortex. The self thus becomes emotionally
113
involved directly in the process of viewing a holographic represen-

tation of the name via this mechanism. This intentional viewing
triggers a priority sort of the memory within the hippocampus –
enabling better retention and recall of the name.
The processes of the mind work through a combination of pro-
gramming, design, and the intentional steering by the self. The self
may drive or direct the mind, but does not necessarily control the
design of the mechanism. There are some benefits of this.
Imagine a situation where a person remembered every trauma ex-
perienced during their lifetime: The pain of being enclosed in the
womb; the trauma of being born; the challenges of growing up; the
pain of every accident or physical injury. Each of these events is
certainly traumatic. If we were to remember every one vividly, we
would be tormented to say the least. The reason why we do not
remember these earlier traumas is because we quickly learned the
lessons they presented to us.
The interaction between the self and the amygdala – the emotional
center of the limbic system – and the memory-oriented regions of
the limbic system such as hippocampus, hypothalamus and the vis-
ual cortex, have been shown in EEG and magnetic resonance stud-
ies. The prefrontal cortex – often referred to as the seat of cognitive
control – is able to modulate these waveform interactions. This
modulation provides the ability to interfere in the memory stacking
and prioritization processes, thereby producing memory suppres-
sion or repression.
In research performed in the Department of Psychology at the
University of Colorado (Depue et al. 2006), subjects were shown
faces paired with either pictures or other faces – some neutral and
some disturbing. After repetition and memorization, the subjects
underwent brain MRIs while being asked to either recall an image
paired with a particular face, or suppress the image.
This gave researchers the ability to trace the regions of the brain
involved with both memory recall and suppression. The study con-
cluded firstly that people are able to successfully suppress disturbing
114
images upon request. This is a substantial point. In addition, MRI

scans demonstrated the involvement of the prefrontal cortex in
memory suppression. The inner self has a considerable amount of
control over our memories, using the prefrontal cortex to exercise
this control.
This relationship between memory and intention has been taught
for many decades by a number of memory experts. Some have writ-
ten and lectured on a process of using emotion to build super-
memories. There also have been many demonstrations by those who
have utilized these methods and developed super-memories. The
basic technique is to connect the detail to be remembered to an
interesting image and/or story. This creates an emotional connec-
tion with the detail. A number of details can thus be memorized by
linking them together into a series of images to create a funny or
unique story.
Forgetting is not necessarily a bad thing, however. An example to
consider is Solomon Shereshevskii (1886-1958), a Russian journalist
who seemed to remember just about everything. Solomon could
remember extensive lists of numbers, facts, details, names and
faces. He was truly one of history’s greatest memorizers. His
method of remembering such detail, it was later discovered, was
due to his ability to connect each fact or figure to a three-
dimensional visual picture. Doing this would allow him to relate
each fact to not only a particular visual picture, but one that had
personal character. This inserted emotion into the memory sorting
process.
Over time, Solomon had problems with his super-memory. He
would not recognize acquaintances years after meeting them be-
cause their faces had aged – he had remembered their earlier faces
too clearly, it seemed. He was also tormented with the vast amount
of details he retained. As a result, Solomon spent his later years lost
in daydreams and reveries, as his bank of vivid memories crowded
out new experiences.
115
Subconsciousness
The theories and concepts proposed by Dr. Janet and Dr. Freud
not much more than a century ago included the notion of the sub-
conscious mind. Hypnosis provided the basis for these conclusions.
Under hypnosis, patients demonstrated an awareness of events and
information seemingly unavailable to their conscious minds during
their normal awakened states.
Because our ‘conscious’ minds appear not to be aware of the subtle
memory programming mechanisms of the mind, the concept of a
subconscious mind appeared to adequately explain these phenom-
ena. We must question this assumption, however. What is this mys-
terious subconsciousness? Why can a person who is brought under
trance – which is simply a state of suggestion and trust – suddenly
be able to recall things that are not otherwise recalled? How does
the programming of the mind otherwise operate beneath the
awareness of the conscious mind? Furthermore, what is dreaming?
The empirical understanding of the existence of a transcendental
inner self seamlessly explains these mysteries. It is precisely the po-
sitioning of the inner self – the operator – within the body that cre-
ates the ability of the mind to submit to the suggestion of hypnosis.
The self simply makes a determination to submit to suggestion, and
the body and mind follow.
It is the cloaking of the self by the veil of misidentification that is
responsible for the mysterious nature of the inner self. Yet it is the
permanence of the inner self throughout the changing physical
body that allows the recall of unmemorized events under hypnosis.
This is because, after all, the self still experienced these events, even
though their mental links are gone.
Although the mind and its programming are set up based upon the
intentions of the self, the mind is still different from the self. The
mind has its own design, and sometimes the mind can get out of
control of the self. As the mind’s programming is developed, it can
take us to places we ultimately do not want to go. It can be carried
away with the directives we have given it. The main directive the
116
self gives the mind is to figure out ways to achieve physical pleas-
ure.
The mind begins to concoct various scenarios for physical enjoy-
ment. Sometimes these scenarios will cross the line of decency or
morality. The self is clearly aware of these lines. However, the mind
will also produce – should the self be open to them – various justi-
fications for the activity to appeal to the morality of the self. We
will then be faced with a moral decision on whether to do some-
thing or not. As this decision is being made, the mind will continue
to throw justifications for the activity on the screen for the self to
review.
This is how we evolve and grow as individuals. As the mind pre-
sents us with choices, we have the ability to make decisions. These
decisions can utilize the resource of intelligence. Through intelli-
gence, we can decide to move the body in such a way that causes
the least amount of frustration and pain upon others. Or we can
decide to seek our own pleasure first and foremost.
Many times nature designs consequences that force a choice be-
tween our own pleasure and our relationships. This forces us to
consider whether our own pleasure is more important to us than
our relationships with others. This conflict between the self’s desire
for pleasure and the desire to unselfishly love is an oft-repeating
lesson for each of us.
In a beautiful symphony of homunculus reflection, humans have in-
vented and assembled televisions, computers and programs to al-
most precisely reflect the functionality of our brains and mental
programming. This adds to the confirmation that our mental and
physical programming stems from an intention self. Like our minds
and brains, computers and televisions are simply reflections of the
desires and objectives of a conscious inner self.
Without the driving force of an intentional self there would be no
need for information. We cannot train a dead rat to do tricks. Nei-
ther can we expect a dead man to remember names by shouting
those names into the body’s ears.
117
All the brain regions and brain cells will still be intact in a newly
deceased dead body. Yet there is no mind running the brain because
there is no intention. The transcendental self has left the body. The
electromagnetic waveform pulses of the brain stop, and the mind
slowly dissolves.
The Lessons of Clinical Death
So what happens at the point of death? While determining this
amongst animals, we do find evidence among human research.
With the advent of resuscitation and medical life-support technolo-
gies has come a proliferation of patients whose bodies have clini-
cally died prior to resuscitation. Author and researcher Dr. Ray-
mond Moody pioneered this research in the 1960s, and introduced
us to the Near Death Experience (or NDE). Dr. Moody presented
hundreds of cases documenting common experiences among pa-
tients who were declared clinically dead and later were resuscitated
in hospital and urgent care facilities.
Dr. Moody’s research reviewed a cross-section of thousands of
cases of patients with a variety of religious and socio-economic
backgrounds. Dr. Moody discovered a common experience: The
patient described separating from the body, and floats above it.
They view the various resuscitation efforts taking place on their
body. This is often followed by a visit with relatives and loved ones.
Traveling at the speed of thought to their homes or remote loca-
tions, they describe trying in vain to communicate with their loved
ones, but they are not heard.
After viewing loved ones, many subjects detailed being drawn into a
darkened tunnel with a bright light at the end. At the end of the
tunnel, many encountered a dazzling person whom they described
as God or an angel of God. Their lives were played back in an in-
stant. Some spoke with this Personality, who in many cases indi-
cated it was not their time yet. Following this, they instantly re-
turned to their body. This often coincided with the resuscitation of
the body (Moody 1975).
118
Naturally, this research had its skeptics. A few questioned Dr.

Moody’s protocols such as patient selection and interviewing tech-
niques. Dr. Moody’s patients were collected as their cases were pre-
sented to him. This offered some but not complete randomness.
This protocol gap was quickly filled by Kenneth Ring, Ph.D. In a
well-received, peer-reviewed study published in 1985, Dr. Ring ran-
domly selected 101 patients who had experienced an NDE. By con-
trast, the 101 patients studied by Dr. Ring were chosen randomly to
eliminate any bias, imagination, hallucination, inconsistency, and
other elements possibly affecting the objectivity of their after-death
experiences.
Of the 101 subjects who underwent clinical death, a third recalled
out-of-body experiences, and a quarter recalled entering the dark-
ness or tunnel with the light at the end. About 60% reported at least
a positive, peaceful experience.
Those NDE subjects whose death was the result of a suicide at-
tempt experienced no tunnel or light. The suicide NDEs in this
study experienced a “murky darkness” after feeling separated from
their body, but did not proceed any further. The rest had little or no
recollection of the experience (Ring 1985).
Ring’s findings – though not in the exact same percentages – were
substantiated by professor of medicine and cardiologist Michael
Sabom, M.D. Dr. Sabom documented his research in a 1982 work
called Recollections of Death: A Medical Investigation. There have been
several other studies confirming NDE experiences as well (Black-
more 1996).
In one, Dr. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross documented a lengthy study
covering over twenty thousand cases of clinical death in her 1991
book On Life After Death – confirming the same primary conclu-
sions arrived at separately by Sabom, Moody and Ring.
Upon review of the other various explanations, it appears unlikely
that any of the possible physical causes could suitably explain NDE.
The only reasonable explanation is that the self is not the body. The
sheer cross-section of people with this same experience provides
119
too much variance to provide any other rational explanation. NDEs

occur regardless of religious reverence, expectations, brain state,
drug-administration, NDE awareness, or biochemical stimulation.
Additionally, when the researchers compared NDE out-of-body
observations with hospital staff reports, they almost without excep-
tion confirmed the observations of NDE subjects – made from
outside of a body clinically dead. While unconscious and with eyes
closed, the patient could hardly be expected to observe those events
– even if by subconscious hearing. This is evident from the detail of
the NDE subject descriptions.
Nonetheless, a few skeptical researchers have suggested that some
sort of paranormal experience is involved in NDE experiences.
However, we must ask these skeptics: How rational it is to accept
the radical notion of a paranormal experience yet not accept an out-
of-body observation? Either scenario requires an independent ob-
server. In either scenario, there must be an observer separate from
the event (clinical death) that can view events and report those
events once being resuscitated.
In all, more than 25,000 clinical deaths have undergone scientific
evaluation. The sheer quantity of near death experiences provides
clear evidence for the fact that the inner self is not subject to the
death of the body. The body is a temporary vehicle. When it breaks
down, the inner self must leave. Should it be resuscitated, the con-
scious being or self may return. It is actually quite simple.
Out of Body Experiences
We have also observed that people can otherwise leave their physi-
cal bodies. This has been evidenced amongst scientists in out of
body experiences and something called remote viewing.
Remote viewing is the ability to observe something outside of the
confines and restrictions of the body’s senses. Remote viewing is
quite similar to NDE because most NDE subjects float above their
body after clinically dying and remotely view the room and those
activities occurring around their clinically dead body. This is the
120
quintessential out-of-body experience and a remote viewing experi-

ence as well.
In addition, many heart surgery patients have accurately reported
remotely viewing the operation while they were clinically uncon-
scious and under complete anesthesia with their eyes and faces cov-
ered. In one case, a heart surgery patient floated above the body and
watched the heart surgeon perform an unusual maneuver that
looked like he was making flapping motions with his arms and el-
bows during the operation.
After the patient awoke, he precisely detailed the entire operation –
including the surgeon’s flapping motions – to the hospital staff.
They were amazed because no one outside of the surgical team
could have known the doctor did this funny little maneuver.
For twenty-three years, the Stanford University Research Institute
studied parapsychological phenomena (also termed PSI – after the
Greek letter psi, or psyche) such as remote viewing with a grant from
the United States government. Two physicists named Dr. Russell
Targ and Dr. Harold Puthoff teamed up for much of this research,
and they conducted controlled experiments under the watchful eye
of the CIA.
Much of this top-secret research was not released to the scientific
community due to its sensitivity to international security. Part of the
research consisted of sealing talented subjects into guarded rooms
with observers. From the sealed rooms, the subjects remotely
viewed and described in detail events and locations thousands of
miles away.
Their viewing documented minute details of the locations, down to
the current weather conditions. They described specific geographi-
cal facilities, the locations of specific buildings, and activities taking
place – years before internet use was common.
The locations and specifics of these observations were controlled
and confirmed as being otherwise unavailable to the viewer. Two
particular viewers, Pat Price and Ingo Swann, were able to identify
military installations around the world, including then-secret Soviet
121
bases on the other side of the planet. They also accurately described
weather conditions at the time of viewing. Other experiments in-
cluded placing objects on a table in a remote room. From a sealed
room located thousands of miles away, the remove viewers were
able to describe the objects in detail, including their positioning and
orientation (Puthoff and Targ 1981; Puthoff et al. 1981).
Other remote viewing experiments over the years have since con-
firmed that many of us have this ability to “see” things not within
our physical sensory range. It has been found that many people
leave their bodies during sleep. Moreover, it seems this skill can be
developed. Targ and Katra (1999) describe being able to develop
that skill by attempting to:
“…separate out the psychic signal from the mental noise of memory, analysis
and imagination.”
These controlled studies illustrate the existence of a seer existing
outside of the realm of the physical senses and neurons of the brain.
If seeing was merely a biochemical and physiological experience
driven by a mixture of molecules and cells, then who is it that is
able to see things beyond the physical range of the eyeballs? Who is
seeing and describing things that are half way around the world?
The limitations of our physical senses have been well established by
science. As humankind has progressed technologically, we continue
to gain new information about things we previously did not per-
ceive through our gross sense organs.
This growing technical facility increasingly makes it clear that our
physical senses only perceive a small portion of the vast spectra of
waveforms around us. Outside of the gross physical spectrum lies
the subtle spectrum, and outside this lies the conscious spectrum. Our
physical eyes and physical instruments simply are not equipped to
see into this spectrum. The spectrum of the conscious dimension is
transcendental to physical sense perception.
122
Transmigration of Consciousness
Transmigration means to move ones consciouness from one loca-
tion to another. With respect to the relationship between the body
and the inner self, to transmigrate means to move out of one body,
and into another.
We are actually seeing the mechanism of transmigration when we
find that a person has traveled up and away from their body, and
after some time, has returned to that body. So we are seeing a per-
son leaving a body, and a person entering a body. In transmigration,
the only difference is that when the person enters a body, it is a
different body than the one they left.
Some might call this reincarnation.
The problem with the word ‘reincarnation’ is that it has been mis-
used and ill defined. People will define this as a “person” (defined
as the body) becoming another “person” (also a body). This of
course is an illogical proposition. We can test this as well, when we
see a dead body decomposing. Obviously, the dead body did not
become another body. It became part of the soil. The conscious-
ness continues to exist separately from the body, as has been
proven in clinical death research.
So for our purposes, we will clarify that reincarnation is also not the
same as transmigration. In transmigration, the transcendental inner
self – the conscious being--moves from one body to another, just as
a person might get out of one car and get into another.
One of the most important points to make in this regard is the fact
that each of us has been moving from one body to the next even
during this present lifetime. Consider looking at your body when it
was in grammar school. Now look at your current body (assuming
you are not still in grammar school!)
That little body looks sort of like your current body in terms of
some of the facial features. But the entire body is different. The
body you wear now is a completely different body. In other words,
you, the inner self, have changed bodies. As the body has gradually
123
replaced all of its cells and molecules, the entire body has changed.
You have effectively transmigrated from one body to the next –
from your grammar-school body to your adult body.
This transmigration continues throughout life. We might compare
the situation to a waterfall. While the waterfall might look the same
from one minute to the next, it contains completely different water
molecules. The actual waterfall is different from one moment to the
next.
Transmigration means to move oneself from one location to an-
other. With respect to the relationship between the body and the
inner self, to transmigrate means to move from one body to the
next. Some also call this reincarnation.
The problem with the word reincarnation is that it has been mis-
used and ill defined. Many people think this means that the person
(defined as the body) becomes another person. This is of course an
illogical proposition. It is also not the same as transmigration.
In transmigration, the transcendental inner self moves from one
body to another, just as a person might get out of one car and get
into another.
One of the most important points to make in this regard is the fact
that each of us has been moving from one body to the next even
during this present lifetime. Consider looking at a picture of your
body when it was in grammar school. Now look at your current
body (assuming you are not still in grammar school!) That little
grammar-school body looks sort of like your current body in terms
of some of the facial features. But the entire body is different. The
body you wear now is a completely different body.
In other words, you, the inner self, has changed bodies. As the body
has gradually replaced all of its cells and molecules, the entire body
has changed. You have effectively transmigrated from one body to
the next – from your grammar-school body to your adult body.
This transmigration continues throughout life. We might compare
the situation to a waterfall. While the waterfall might look the same
124
from one minute to the next, it contains completely different water

molecules. The actual waterfall is different from one moment to the
next. It maintains the same shape and outer appearance, but it is
made up of different elements from one moment to the next.
As our body changes and recycles matter, the manner in which it
changes is based upon the condition of our mind and conscious-
ness. Those things we – the inner self – are interested in are ex-
pressed through our mind and body. Once we condition our mind
to particular things, the mind becomes attached. As the mind be-
comes attached, the body’s cells and genes cooperate and form
around the condition of the mind.
Thus the form and condition of the body is shaped around the at-
tachments of the mind. We can see this through this lifetime. A
person who likes to eat will gradually develop a body that is capable
of eating a lot of food. A person who likes to run will gradually
develop a body that can run very efficiently.
Athletes refer to this as training. When they want to excel in a cer-
tain sport they will train for that sport. The focus of their mind is
concentrated upon conditioning the body. This will change the
shape of the body to excel in that particular sport.
This same mechanism also works when we change bodies. At the
time of death, the condition of our mind and consciousness will
determine the form of the next body the inner self inhabits.
This reality is confirmed by a vast amount of scientific research
performed over the past forty years by eminent scientists. The
process, called past-life recall, was in part developed by Dr. Ian
Stevenson, a medical doctor and professor of research at the Uni-
versity of Virginia, Department of Psychiatric Medicine. Over sev-
eral decades of research, Dr. Stevenson conducted extensive inter-
views with children, during which led to their recall of a previous
lifetime.
It is interesting how Dr. Stevenson’s transmigration research began.
Being a conservative psychiatrist and medical professor, Dr. Steven-
son had no prior belief in the transmigration of the self. But he
125
became convinced when one of his younger patients recalled their

previous life with accuracy.
After researching the patient's history and finding incredible accu-
racy in their account – in both detail and historical record – Dr.
Stevenson began documenting other cases of past life remembrance
among children.
His research documented over 2,000 cases of children who detailed
previous lifetimes as historical persons, describing events with a
clarity and experience only possible from having lived personally in
that situation. Dr. Stevenson and his associate research scientists
meticulously corroborated the accuracy of many of these details,
leaving them to conclude that many children can recall their previ-
ous lifetimes prior to the age of seven.
Though undoubtedly controversial, the research has been thor-
oughly peer-reviewed. Other researchers have since taken up similar
studies, finding similar results.
Over thirty scientific books and hundreds of scientific papers have
been written to document past-life recall studies by experts, includ-
ing M.D.s and/or licensed psychiatrists.
Dr. Stevenson and his associates meticulously documented these
recollections along with the confirmations of their historical accu-
racy. Dr. Stevenson wrote several books on the subject, presenting
the evidence in a clinically rigorous and scientific manner (Steven-
son 1997; Tucker 2005).
Dr. Stevenson’s research spanned over thirty-seven years, and his
documented thousands of cases can still be examined in his books
and original file records. In most cases, at least some of the account
of previous life recognition was corroborated through independent
investigation.
Another form of evidence has been provided through hypnother-
apy. A number of other scientists have documented regressing pa-
tients through hypnotherapy into verifiable past lives, including Dr.
Helen Wambach (1978), Dr. Morris Netheron (1978), Dr. Edit
126
Fiore (1978), Dr. Bruce Goldberg (1982), Dr. Joel Whitton (1986),
Dr. Brian Weiss (1988), Dr. Christopher Bache (1994), Dr. Wi-
nafred Lucas (1993), Dr. Marge Rieder (1995; 1999) along with a
number of others.
One of the more interesting studies was led by Dr. Rieder. She ini-
tially documented regression sessions with a number of patients
that revealed historical information regarding Millboro, VA – a piv-
otal village during the Civil War. These subjects accurately described
many historical and little-known details of the war and the town,
details that were corroborated historically.
The subjects had no other way of knowing those details. For exam-
ple, many of the subjects described the use of a number of inter-
connected tunnels and hideaways in Millboro used during the war.
Prior to the hypnosis regression, many of these tunnels and hide-
aways were not known even by historians. The regression detailed
the precise location of the tunnels, leading the researchers to dis-
cover them for the first time since the war.
To this, we can add the research of Dr. Michael Newton, a psy-
chologist and master hypnotist who regressed patients into the pe-
riod between their last body and the current body. Dr. Newton’s
patients consistently tell of inter-life judgment scenarios, karma and
other topics in his 1994 Journey of Souls: Studies of Life between Lives,
and his 2000 work, Destiny of Souls: New Case Studies of Life between
Lives. Dr. Newton was a clinical specialist in pain management who
stumbled onto the reality of past-lives while treating patients. His
texts document some fifteen years of clinical research, and empiri-
cally illustrate the transitional (“judgment day”) phase that exists
after the death of this body.
An Ancient Knowledge
The transmigration of the soul is not a new thesis. In fact, it has a
long-standing history of thousands of years. Prior to 2,000 years
ago, transmigration of the self was embraced by most of the prevail-
ing religions and philosophies of those times.
127
This not only included the Vedic and Buddhist philosophies. It also
included the Egyptians, Mayans, American Indians, Aboriginals and
many others. In fact, all of the early great religions understood
transmigration of the self as a basic tenet of their philosophy.
The Greeks, Romans, and Northern Europeans also assumed this
philosophy – as did the Hebrew religion prior to the period of King
Constantine and successors – who oversaw the politically-driven
Synods of Nicea of the fourth century on. These specifically banned
the teachings of transmigration of the self as put forth by early fa-
thers of the Christian church such as Origen of Alexandria.
Origen Adamantius (185-254 A.D.) was a devout Christian scholar
and minister who was a close associate of the Bishop of Alexandria.
Origen had a flourishing school in Alexandria during the third cen-
tury. He was considered one of the fathers of the early Christian
church for several centuries. Consistent with the conclusions in this
book, Origen taught that the self was spirit in essence, and tran-
scendental to the body. Origen taught that each of us initially fell
from God’s grace by choice and took on a physical body. Once
within the physical plane, the spiritual self then descends through
the species, taking on one body after another, until again rising back
to the human form of life. Here in the human form, Origen taught,
we have the rare opportunity to return to God – should we use this
human form wisely.
Should we make some progress but not enough, Origen taught, we
may take on another human form until we progressed (evolved) to
the level of returning to the spiritual world.
However, if we got caught up in the chase for animalistic pleasures
– eating, sex, and so on – we may once again fall into the animal
forms to again transmigrate between countless physical forms until
we have another chance in the human form. This journey through
the lower species, Origen taught, was equivalent to going to hell.
There is a substantial amount of evidence that Jesus also taught the
transmigration of the self. The Gnostic books of the Essenes, a
society that Jesus lived in, support this, and even some of the four
128
gospels of the New Testament indicate this possibility. For exam-

ple, we find in the New Testament (NIV) that Jesus’ disciples asked
this question about a blind man:
"Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?" (John
9:1)
Let’s consider the question asked carefully. Why did Jesus’ disciples
ask this question? First we should consider that multiple disciples
asked this question and not just one ‘rogue’ disciple. This means
that it was a question that arose from an understanding between
Jesus and his disciples from Jesus’ teachings.
In other words, it was assumed that before the man was born, he
had the ability to sin. In other to have the ability to sin, the man must
have had a previous physical body. Why? Because as Jesus taught
previously, sinning was an action brought upon by the flesh. In
other words, the person must have had a prior physical body in
order to have sinned before he was born.
Note also that Jesus did not ridicule or criticize this question. He
took it in stride. He did not say, “what a preposterous question.”
What he said was:
"Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but this happened so that the work of
God might be displayed in his life. As long as it is day, we must do the work of
Him who sent me.” (John 9:2)
Because Jesus accepted that the man could have sinned, he admitted
that the man must have lived prior to his being born into that body.
While he is saying that the activities of his previous life did not
cause his blindness, Jesus is acknowledging that they could have.
Jesus in fact is saying that there was another purpose to the blind-
ness other than as a consequence of his previous activities – previous
to being born blind.
We can add to this that Origen was a famous and devout person
who dedicated his life to Jesus. In the end he became a martyr for
his devotion to Jesus and God. Origen received the teachings of
Jesus through his father, Leonides, a devoted Christian teacher who
129
was also persecuted for his determined faith in God. There is good
reason to believe that Origen’s teachings were directly in line with
one of Jesus’ disciples.
Origen was one of the most prolific Christian writers and well-
known Christian teachers of that era, with possibly thousands of
students at his Catechetical School of Alexandria, where Clement of
Alexandria had also instructed. Origen’s teachings were also sup-
ported by the bishops Alexander of Jerusalem and Theoctistus of
Caesarea of that time, and he had a close personal relationship with
Demetrius, the Bishop of Alexandria.
Origen was a devoted Christian who gave personal care for thou-
sands of imprisoned Christians. He was a prolific writer, and his
commentaries and translations of scriptures were well respected
throughout the region. He is said to have produced some 6,000
writings during his lifetime. In one, Origen wrote:
Or is it not more in conformity with reason, that every soul, for certain mysteri-
ous reasons is introduced into a body, and introduced according to its deserts and
former actions? It is probable, therefore, that this soul also, which conferred more
benefit by its former residence in the flesh than that of many men (to avoid
prejudice, I do not say "all"), stood in need of a body not only superior to others,
but invested with all excellent qualities. (Against Celsus, I.32)
Certainly, the dedication and passion Origen had for serving God
and Jesus, and his acceptance by the early church indicates that he
wouldn’t have simply made up the philosophy of the transmigration
of the self without a strong foundation of scripture. Origen in fact
was highly committed to scripture as having ultimate authority, and
all of his writings quoted scriptural passages. These facts all add up
to one certain notion: That the transmigration of the soul was em-
braced by many in the early Christian church in the second century
after Jesus’ disappearance. Are we to deny the possibility that it was
also part of Jesus’ teachings as well?
Everything changed in the fourth century. In 325 A.D. and periodi-
cally thereafter, Constantine and his successors organized the He-
brew/Christian church and dictated its teachings through the legis-
130
lation of the Synods of Nicea. Here bishops of different regions

were brought together into a politically oriented committee to pro-
duce a unilateral interpretation of the Jewish faith and Christianity.
These and other governmental decrees resulted in massive restric-
tions on what could be taught within the Hebrew and Christian
world. These culminated in an insidious persecution of anyone in-
volved in teaching the transmigration of the self – which has con-
tinued (though less violently) through modern times. Evidence of
this is found in the Fifth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople, as
it pushed forth this official anathema (meaning “to banish”) against
Origen and similar teachers:
“If anyone does not anathematize Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, Apollinaris,
Nestorius, Eutyches and Origen, as well as their impious writings, as also all
other heretics already condemned and anathematized by the Holy Catholic and
Apostolic Church, and by the aforesaid four Holy Synods and if anyone does
not equally anathematize all those who have held and hold or who in their impi-
ety persist in holding to the end the same opinion as those heretics just men-
tioned: let him be anathema.” (5th Ecumenical Council: Constantinople
II, 553)
We notice here that other great teachers are also being banished
together with Origen. These include Nestorius, who was the
Archbishop of Constantinople in the fifth century; and Apollinaris,
who was either Apollinaris Claudius, Bishop of Phrygia or Apolli-
naris of Laodicea, the Bishop of Laodicea (Syria).
The ancient traditions of gnosis, hermeticism and hellenism, which
descended through the Greek texts from antiquity inclusive of an-
cient Egyptian teachings, also taught transmigration. Hermes Tris-
megistus, revered amongst Christian, Islam and Jewish sects, is said
to have stated:
“O son, how many bodies have we to pass through; how many bands of demons;
through how many series of repetitions and cycles of the stars; before we hasten to
the One alone?”
We also find this passage, translated from ancient sermons and
fragments of later Trismegistic literature (Mead 1906):
131
“What then is the value nowadays of that ancient doctrine mentioned by Plato,
about the reciprocal migration of souls; how they remove hence and go thither,
and then return higher and pass through life. And then again depart from this
life, made quick again from the dead? Some will have it that this is a doctrine of
Pythagoras, while Albinus will have it to be a divine pronouncement, perhaps of
Egyptian Hermes.”
There is also evidence that the teaching was accepted by the original
teachings of the Koran:
“How can ye reject the faith in Allah? Seeing that you were without life, and
He gave you life; then will He cause you to die, and will again bring you to life;
and again to Him will you return.” (Al-Baqara 2:28)
Today, transmigration of the self is most often considered an East-
ern religious philosophy, along the lines of the Buddhist or Hindu
faiths. These teach almost an identical description of transmigration
as that taught by Origen and Hermes. Here the self is also described
as a transcendental spiritual entity transmigrating from one body to
the next. As the self evolves, it takes on progressively higher forms
until the human form is achieved.
In the human form, according to the most ancient Vedic texts, the
self has an opportunity to return home to God and the transcen-
dental world. Should the self be caught in the ‘wheel’ of karma, it
may be dragged once again down into the lower forms of life:
“As a person puts on new garments, giving up old ones, similarly, the soul ac-
cepts new material bodies, giving up the old and useless ones.” (Bhagavad
Gita, Ch. 2, Txt 22)
While showing that this was an ancient belief throughout early relig-
ions, this in itself does not prove the case. This ancient knowledge
is also supported by the scientific evidence. As we’ve outlined so far
in this text, we can scientifically establish the transmigration of con-
sciousness from one body to the next within this single lifetime.
With the knowledge that the atoms of the physical body are con-
stantly recycling, we can know that there is a static, conscious entity
dwelling within an ever-changing physical body. Since the physical
132
body is constantly changing just as the water in a waterfall is always

changing while the conscious entity is constant, we can know the
conscious entity is transmigrating from one body to the next within
even this physical lifetime.
And as established by clinical death research, the conscious entity
also continues to exist after the death of this body. Where does it
go?
133
Chapter Four
Evolution of Consciousness
The Science of Fox, Wolf and Dog Breeding
Over the half century, scientists have been increasingly interested in
the development and evolution of dogs, and why they are consid-
ered “man’s best friend.” As a result, many experiments have been
done to determine w
Accidental evolutionists have had a rough time with things like why
there are so many breeds of dogs. There are big dogs, little dogs,
hairy dogs, skinny dogs, dogs with floppy ears and dogs with
pointed ears; dogs who bark loud but don’t bite and dogs that don’t
bark much but bite hard.
There are red dogs, white dogs, brown dogs, spotted dogs and all
sorts of other color mixes. There are dogs with flat faces, dogs with
pointed noses and dogs with long wiener-shaped bodies. There are
bald dogs with smooth skin, skinny dogs with curly white hair, and
big hairy dogs with muscular, large bodies.
Why so many different dog types? What function produced all these
different mutations?
Prevailing thought is that all of these various dog breeds evolved
from one ‘master’ dog species: the wolf. In order to accomplish
this, however, a curious accidental evolutionary process has been
proposed to explain all these mutations. This means that all these
mutations must have taken place only within the last 10,000-14,000
years.
While this theory has been controversial, and DNA research has
been confounding, recent studies using the DNA from mitochon-
dria rather than DNA from the cell nucleus has indicated that the
theory that all these dog species evolved from the wolf – more spe-
cifically, the grey wolf--is plausible. The problem, however, is that
the mitochondria research also indicates that the evolution of
wolves to dogs began over 100,000 years ago.
135
Regardless of these controversies, the theory says that the wolf was
gradually bred by humans into more and more domesticated ver-
sions. This also means all the different and crazy mutations such as
terriers, dachshunds, boxers and chihuahuas. How and why did
these nutty-looking dogs develop their characteristics? What evolu-
tionary benefit did it give them? And why would these dogs mutate
so quickly, while the development of other species generally has
taken millions of years to take place. Certainly, the features didn’t
help them survive longer or better. In fact, in many cases these
“pure breed” dogs actually die sooner than normal dogs, with ail-
ments caused by malfunctioning organs inherent among that breed.
In the 1950s, a fox domestication breeding experiment that contin-
ues to this day was directed by Dr. Dmitry Belyaev of the then-
Soviet Union’s Institute of Cytology and Genetics in Novosibirsk,
Siberia. The intent of this long-term study was to determine the
genetic role humans played in the domestication of animals. Most
importantly, he wanted to study how contact with humans might
bring about not only new behavior but also changes in body fea-
tures and physiology.
The prime subjects of the study were silver foxes, who were cruelly
caged while they and their offspring were put into various degrees
of contact with humans.
The foxes were also selected for human contact. In other words,
from each litter a fox that was more amenable to human handling
was segregated and bred. Then from that fox’s litter, again a single
fox who related better with humans was selected. This selection
process has continued over the decades. These foxes selected for
human companionship were also handled by the trainers as they
were raised.
Along with this pro-human selection came a negative-human selec-
tion. The fox from each litter that was most aggressive towards
humans was also selected and bred, generation after generation.
This breeding experiment results have been revealing. After over
thirty generations of foxes were selected and bred, as well as han-
136
dled and petted by humans, the resulting foxes became like pets.
They became domesticated, and readily accepted petting and being
picked up humans.
Those bred for aggression became like, according to lead research-
ers, “dragons.” They were extremely violent, and if not kept in
cages, they would readily attack humans.
A number of physical changes were apparent among those foxes
bred for human contact when compared to undomesticated control
groups. One was the development of droopy ears among the do-
mesticated foxes. Rather than the perky upright ears seen among so
many wild wolves and foxes, these domesticated foxes had devel-
oped floppy ears over the generations.
Another physical change was the development of different types of
tails. Some grew significantly different types of tails, including
shorter and fatter. There was also an increase in curled tails among
the domesticated foxes.
Dr. Belyaev speculated that the pointed ears and tails were possibly
used for defense purposes (to stand tall against challengers) and to
sense the external environment in a more defensive manner. During
captivity within the protective dens provided by humans, these fa-
cilities were not necessary for survival.
Differences were also seen in circulating neurotransmitter and hor-
mone levels among the foxes. Domesticated foxes had significantly
higher levels of serotonin and dopamine in the bloodstream, and
their corticosteroids would cycle differently at different levels than
their wild relatives. They also had lower circulating levels of adrena-
line.
Accompanying these physical changes, the behavioral changes
among the foxes bred for human kindness were unmistakable. Over
the generations, they became increasingly relaxed and comfortable
around humans, responding positively to petting and other touch-
ing. Their ability to respond and communicate with humans also
increased over the generations as well.
137
The Russian researchers, and outside researchers have assumed that

this research confirms that over thousands of years, humans selec-
tively bred wolves simply by partnering with them for hunting and
gathering. Over the generations, the wolves became increasingly
domesticated. Gradually, their physical appearances also changed
along with their increased acceptance of humans.
In other words, with a gradual change in their consciousness to-
wards humans, their physical bodies began to change.
The researchers have all summed this up to a simple breeding issue,
where the selection of those friendlier to humans created DNA
traits that were passed down to their litter. Yes, this is likely so,
since DNA is a recording of traits from one generation to the next.
But there is still an undeniable link between the consciousness of
those foxes selected for human contact and their genetics. What is
it?
This research indicates a connection between changed conscious-
ness and the alteration of the physical body. When we consider the
central difference between the domesticated environment and the
undomesticated environment, the central difference outside of the
fear of attack was the being in the company of an organism (hu-
mans) of higher consciousness.
The human trainers expressed companionship through petting,
talking and feeding. These are all expressions of higher conscious-
ness. Note also that decreased fear from attack is also related to
consciousness.
The physical and behavioral alterations followed the foxes being in
the proximity and care of humans. We would then logically connect
these physical alterations of the floppy ears, curled tails and altered
hormones to their increased contact with humans. Because human
consciousness is different from fox consciousness, we can readily
make the association. We can connect physical alterations to altera-
tions in consciousness contact.
138
Dr. Belyaev assumed that the changes were completely due to the
animals being selectively bred, and not having to defend against
predators. However, the second conclusion is contradicted by the
fact that the group of hostile wolves also did not have to defend
against predators, and they turned out pretty aggressive.
The element that is being overlooked is that along with the selective
breeding came the active contact with humans. Without that con-
tact, there would be no traits to pass down.
The contact with humans was how the foxes were selected, and
following their selection, they were actively handled by humans on
an ongoing basis. So the interaction with humans was central to
both their selection and their ongoing care.
This means that the foxes bred for human contact, also had signifi-
cant human contact, and those bred for violence against humans
had violent human contact. So it is these traits--connecting con-
sciousness with DNA--that were passed down.
In other words, those foxes are not chemical robots. They are con-
scious beings. They are connecting with humans due to the fact that
they were alive, and thus had consciousness.
We can see several things going on here:
1) As the foxes gradually got closer to humans, they began relating with their
human handlers.
2) With these new relationships, physical changes began taking place. Their
bodies and behavior – reflecting their new surroundings and contact with hu-
mans of higher consciousness – were altered.
3) These traits were then increasingly passed down to the next generation via
their genes.
Although we all accept readily the physical changes caused by a
changing environment, the critical issue here is the consciousness ele-
ment. While we can all accept that a changing environment will cre-
ate alterations, this alone – as we have discussed – does not explain
the various species and the definite distinctions between them.
139
This element of consciousness is now emerging as part of the new-

est human evolution theories: That humankind got smarter as it
dealt with variable climates. Who got smarter? A body? A brain?
No. We are talking about consciousness here, not physiology.
Note the increased hormone levels among the foxes came as a new
twist on the accidental evolutionary theory. Suddenly accidental
evolutionists were faced with a secretion of hormones that are pro-
duced from conscious behavior.
In other words, the foxes’ increased neurochemistry resulted from
human contact: petting, feeding, and other emotional expressions of
consciousness. The contact with species of differing consciousness
changed their neurochemistry.
This neurochemistry response is typical among living organisms of
practically every species. When human mothers feed their babies,
for example, they produce a hormone called oxytocin. Oxytocin is a
feel-good hormone that sends messages to the brain and mind that
everything is good.
Most mammals also produce this same hormone when they are
breastfeeding. Oxytocin, in fact, is also produced when two people
are relating intimately. And new research has found that both dogs
and humans will produce it when they are relating with each other
positively.
In other words, oxytocin is a hormone response to two or more
living beings connecting from a conscious level. Yes, there is cer-
tainly a physical level to the connection. But the body does not pro-
duce oxytocin when just any body comes into contact with another
body. The two living organisms have to be connecting from a
deeper level. This deeper level is sometimes referred to as empathy.
And empathy is an emotion that comes from deep within: It comes
from the living self.
DNA and Birth
The other thing that the Belyaev research indicates is the connec-
tion between an incoming conscious being and particular DNA traits. As
140
the generations of human-contact foxes progressed, more and more

of the litter would consist of baby foxes that wanted contact with
humans. What is it that brings together consciousness and DNA? Is
DNA determining whether the foxes will take kindly to humans?
No.
This is proven by identical twin research. In identical twins, the
DNA is identical. The DNA of one twin is a copy of the others.
The two twins have identical DNA, yet they are completely differ-
ent individuals. Twins will lead radically different lives, as has been
proven in numerous studies. We laid out a few of these studies in
the first chapter.
So if twins have identical DNA, and they live different lives, we
know that consciousness is separate from the DNA – and the con-
scious being is separate from DNA. At the same time, however,
DNA definitely does predispose the tendency for certain behavior,
as we can see from both the less aggressive fox breeding and the
more aggressive fox breeding. The issue is not as simple as genetics.
This element of DNA and consciousness is further confounded by
the results of other experiments, done on wolves. In one, dog pups
were taken from litters and raised by humans for the first few
months of life. Not surprisingly, the dogs became attached the hu-
mans and became bonded. The raising and subsequent relationships
were videotaped and analyzed.
Following this, the same humans were given wolf pups from a litter
of undomesticated wolves, and brought up exactly the same way the
dog pups were raised by the humans. They were bottle fed by the
humans, and nurtured with day and night companionship with the
humans.
The wolves did become somewhat attached to the humans with
regard to being fed and protected. But they became increasingly
aggressive towards their human handlers. Eventually – after about
two months – the wolves had to be taken away from their human
handlers for safety reasons. Despite being nurtured precisely the
141
same as the dog pups were, these baby wolves were not going to be
domesticated.
This research illustrated that genes trump nurturing when it comes
to animal species. Yet at the same time, the wolves brought up by
humans – like the foxes selected for human handling--did display
some changes after being raised by humans. But they didn’t become
as domesticated as the dog pups had.
So what does this combination of research show us? First it shows
that a species can evolve with changes in consciousness. Second, it
shows that genes influence behavior. Third, it shows that ones con-
sciousness matches an appropriate DNA.
The only real plausible solution to the confounding results of these
studies – is that the consciousness of the conscious being is
matched to the appropriate DNA at conception. In other words, a
person’s consciousness determines the precise DNA they will as-
sume. This means that ones body is precisely a reflection of the
person’s consciousness prior to conception.
As illustrated earlier in the epigenetic research, DNA also adjusts to
consciousness after the conscious being is connected with the body.
Once again, DNA is being matched to consciousness. A person
who chooses to live a certain way – or a fox that is handled by hu-
mans – will gradually experience that their body adjusts to this life-
style. These adjustments then change their DNA. Should these epi-
genetic DNA changes occur prior to reproduction, their DNA
adjustments will likely be passed on to the next generation.
This was shown in research (Ribasés et al. 2005) done among eight
European countries. The researchers found that periodic famines
would dramatically change many generations of metabolism, and
their subsequent body mass indexes (BMI). The epigenetic adjust-
ments of those parents were passed down to the genes of their off-
spring.
A conscious being that is transmigrating into a new body is then
pulled into that particular type of body. Once within the body, their
142
environment and/or changes in consciousness will force changes in

their DNA.
Furthermore, once they leave that particular body, their conscious-
ness will determine the DNA they assume in their next body.
Evolution and Consciousness
Let’s look at this from a practical standpoint.
Consider for a moment how our bodies can change and adapt to a
change in consciousness. Consider, for example, how an overweight
person can decide to improve his health. So he begins running eve-
ryday. After several years of running, his body becomes slender,
with well-built calves and thighs.
Over time the DNA in the man’s cells also begin to mutate, making
the cell more efficient in utilizing glucose and oxygen. The cell’s
metabolism will increase, and various other physiological functions
adapt to adjust. Expanded lung capacity, larger heart muscles and
other changes will take place in the body.
On the other hand, a person who likes to eat and does not exercise
much will probably develop a larger stomach, enabling more eating.
Their metabolism will decrease, adapting to that behavior.
Certainly the physical body changes as a result of particular activi-
ties. However, prior to the change in activities came a decision to
change that activity. This decision arises from consciousness. For
this reason, the shape of our body and our activities will reflect our
consciousness.
Should we decide to become a boxer, we will probably end up with
a broken or twisted nose and a puffy, scarred facial countenance.
Likewise, a hardened violent criminal will probably have a number
of scars and injuries as a result of his or her choices in life. His body
may also end up dead because of his consciousness.
On the other hand, an accountant will probably have more delicate
physical features, and probably smaller, weaker muscles as a result
143
of his or her choices and activities. An athletic accountant will

probably have a longer life than the violent criminal will as well.
We can easily see how our physical features reflect our conscious-
ness in so many different ways. Considering our consciousness to
be a combination of our current desires and past behavior, we can
see how our accumulated situation reflects either decisions we may
have made in this lifetime or a past lifetime.
As our consciousness changes, so does our body. We can thus sci-
entifically and logically conclude that our bodies (and species) re-
flect our own personal consciousness. And as that consciousness
evolves, so do our bodies.
Even the smallest creatures such as bacteria show the same desire
for survival, companionship and adaptation responses that larger
creatures do. In numerous studies and observations, researchers
have observed that bacteria respond to various stimuli in much the
same way that any creature does. They are attracted to elements that
bring physical comfort and are repelled by elements that cause dis-
comfort, pain or a threat of death.
Furthermore, they have a memory of what caused pain or comfort
in the past, and they can thus respond appropriately. Their basic
responses are no different from other living organisms. This is evi-
denced by pathogenic bacteria learning to adapt to medicines like
antibiotics.
Because these creatures are physically different, we often do not
consider them conscious beings. Yet they respond to challenges and
adapt the same way most other creatures do, including humans.
When a bacteria or insect physically adapts to a new threat this is
obviously an attempt to survive and avoid pain. The threat creates a
challenge to survival.
Since these organisms are alive, they are conscious. Since they are con-
scious, they avoid pain and death. In the same way a human might
don a camouflage outfit to outsmart an opponent, a bacteria or
insect might develop new physical traits to resist a particular poison.
They cannot quite change species, but they can adapt within limita-
144
tions. These adaptations are merely different ways organisms ex-

press their consciousness of being alive and their intent to become
happy.
Anatomical Changes and the Search for Fulfillment
Making physical changes in response to environmental stress is the
conscious being’s search for happiness reflected physically. For
example, the immune system of an organism will deter invaders,
developing new antibodies to increase the likelihood for physical
survival. This is the same as actively fighting off predators.
All living organisms try to avoid physical destruction in an attempt
to keep their physical bodies as comfortable as possible. This is in
hopes that the physical body will generate some ultimate fulfillment.
Meanwhile an organism focuses upon relationships with family and
friends as another means for potential fulfillment.
The commonality among the various creatures is that within each
physical shell is a conscious being who is searching for fulfillment
within the temporary physical dimension. As a result, the conscious
being’s desires will cause a manipulation in its physical shell.
This manipulation of the physical shell is common among all organ-
isms that contain a conscious being. At the end of the day, both the
physical shell and the attempt to manipulate the physical shell is a
reflection of the conscious being’s desires and consciousness. This
of course reflects the inner self’s ongoing desire for fulfillment.
The Evolving Conscious being
There is a more practical and logical explanation for the develop-
ment and existence of living organisms: It is the conscious being who is
evolving. The physical body each conscious being dwells within
merely reflects that evolution. Thus, the physical forms that con-
scious beings inhabit evolve around the consciousness of the specific
conscious beings who dwell inside each form.
An adaptive and organized mechanism enables conscious beings to
be incorporated into changing physical bodies that reflect their de-
sires and consciousness. This mechanism guides conscious beings
145
through a learning process in order to achieve greater or lower lev-

els of awareness, depending upon the specific desires and con-
sciousness of each conscious being.
Consider for example, if we watched our neighbor pull his newer
blue car out of the garage every day. Then one day we are surprised
to see that the car is a completely different color. It is the same car,
but instead of being blue, the car is now red. What is the first thing
we will think? Why did our neighbor have his car painted another color?
We would never consider that our neighbor’s car simply randomly
changed colors. We would never think that somehow, the car’s old
color suddenly became another color. Because we know our
neighbor is not his car, but is the driver of his car, we assume that the
change in the car’s color was the result of our neighbor deciding he
wanted his car another color.
We assume it was the conscious choice or our neighbor, because our
neighbor is superior to the car. The car is our neighbor’s mechanical
slave. The neighbor controls the car at all times, unless it is stolen.
Since our neighbor is superior to the car, our neighbor decides what
color the car will be. The car does not make any such decision, be-
cause it is of an inferior substance: It is not alive.
The Superior Substance
The conscious being is superior to physical chemistry. The con-
scious being is manifest with personality, individuality, a quest for
truth and goodness, and the need for relationships. Through an
arrangement of design, this superior conscious being (each of us) is
able to influence physical chemistry through will, desire, and inten-
tion.
As a result, the conscious being is able to indirectly adjust the
physical body within certain designed guidelines, through the ongo-
ing status of the conscious being’s desires and past activities. This
influential role of the conscious being on the body renders the
physical body a reflection of the specific consciousness of the con-
scious being utilizing it.
146
Can we scientifically prove such a notion? We do not need to, be-

cause we see it every day in our lives. We see that people will put on
makeup. They will change their hair color. They will wear different
clothes. They will get suntans. They will put on teeth whiteners.
Some will workout in some way to slim down.
All of these activities change the body. Does the body decide it
wants to change its teeth color? No, the superior conscious con-
scious being who operates that body decides she wants to change
the teeth color of the body. It is a conscious decision made by the
superior conscious living person within the body.
A Reason to Survive
Every living organism struggles to survive. Attempting to avoid
death only illustrates that the conscious being within has an ultimate
reason for living within the physical body. Conscious beings all in-
nately want to remain living. Because the conscious being within
begins to identify with the physical body, we struggle to survive.
Why would any creature desire to avoid death unless its central
characteristic was being alive? Survival is hard work. Creatures work
very hard to eat and drink enough to survive every day. In terms of
energy expended, dying would certainly be much easier. Living or-
ganisms all pursue survival because there is an ultimate reason for
living.
This lies at the very root of the evolution of consciousness.
The missing link within the concept of survival and evolution is an
understanding of who desires to survive. If we accept that in order
to distinguish life from dead chemicals there must be an awareness
of life; the question becomes: Who is aware of being alive? Who dis-
tinguishes itself from non-life?
Distinguishing between life and non-life requires an entity who
must be conscious of being alive, and who must value life. Without
valuing life there would be no quest to survive, as dead chemistry
would preferable since it requires no effort to remain alive.
147
If we accept the existence of a being who in every living creature

desires to survive, then we must ask, for whose benefit is survival?
If the living organism dies, which all living organisms do, then who
is left to benefit from the that species’ longer survival? Why would a
bag of chemicals adapt so that the next generation could survive
better? What would the purpose of that extended survival be?
The living being, relative to its current level of consciousness, has
specific desires, goals, and a basic quest to survive. The living being
is capable of love, fear, anger, compassion, and consciousness be-
cause the living being is alive, and these elements are characteristics
of living beings.
As components of conscious beings, these emotions translate and
reflect through each physical species in one way or another. The
conscious being is the source of the energy and personality residing
within each physical body.
Whether single-celled, human, animal or plant, every living organ-
ism is powered by a distinct conscious being. Without a conscious
being inside, the body is lifeless and there is no quest to survive.
Without the conscious being’s continued quest for survival, there
can be no functioning DNA, nor any altering of DNA.
With the physical eyes of our physical bodies, we cannot perceive
this conscious being. This is because the conscious being is non-
physical and transcendental to the body.
With this understanding of the conscious being, we can begin to
make sense of how and why the conscious being evolves, and why
the particular species reflect that evolution. We can also understand
why species are so similar.
Let’s now clarify the elements that provide the foundation for the
evolution of the conscious:
The body is constantly changing: The physical body is a moving,
changing structure. It is constantly undergoing molecular and bio-
logical transition, as it exchanges molecules, cells, and form. The
physical bodies we wear now are not the physical bodies we wore
148
even a year ago. Within five years, every molecule has been ex-
changed for a new one, and we are wearing a completely different
body.
Each conscious being has emotion: As evidenced by experi-
ments on plants, bacteria, and other types of animals, all species
have the capacity to exhibit emotions. Each living organism exhibits
the will to survive and avoid pain. Through these exhibitions, each
organism seeks relative happiness.
Each conscious being is distinct: All living organisms, including
humans, animals, plants, bugs, amoebae, and so on, each have
within their respective physical shell, a distinct individual conscious
being. This conscious being is an individual, separate from their
family members, separate from their species, separate from every-
one else. We can test this simply by having a desire for something.
We have that particular desire at that particular time, but our
neighbor does not.
Each conscious being is transcendental to physical nature:
The conscious being cannot be measured, quantified physically, nor
perceived by the physical senses. It is of another dimension. The
conscious being’s actual nature is transcendental – outside of the
physical dimension.
Each transcendental embodied conscious being is prone to
misidentify with the body: The risk of being embodied is mistak-
enly assuming that identity. The conscious being mistakenly identi-
fies itself as the physical body, seeking satisfaction through physical
means.
The physical shell of each conscious being adapts to envi-
ronmental challenges: The conscious being, seeking fulfillment
through physical embodiment, stimulates an adaptive physical re-
sponse to environmental and internal challenges. This is an attempt
to improve physical conditions – increasing the likelihood of physi-
cal happiness – just as the man improved his house to suit his lik-
ing.
149
The current physical shell of a conscious being reflects the

consciousness and prior activities of the conscious being
within: Each species of physical body allows different capabilities
of expression and consciousness. Some species have greater capa-
bilities for awareness while others have less. The distinct capabilities
of each physical body of each species reflect the graduated con-
sciousness (or evolution) of the particular conscious being occupy-
ing that body.
The mind is a subtle body covering the conscious being,
forming the platform upon which the gross physical body is
formed: We shape the mind by our various desires and sense activi-
ties. The mind thus creates the basis for the type of senses and the
type of physical forms we take on.
The human form of life is capable of greater awareness and thus
has greater responsibility for the decisions made by conscious be-
ings within these forms: The human form of physical body has a
greater awareness of life and the consequences of activities. The
human form is a life of greater responsibility. The human form is a
lifetime at the crossroads.
Now let’s discuss some of these points with greater detail:
Learning and Evolving are Linked
Every step of our physical lives within these temporary bodies, we
are constantly given choices. With each choice is a consequence.
Should we decide to help another, or care for another, there will be
a good consequence.
Should we decide to take advantage of another, or abuse or hurt
another, there will be a negative consequence--one that shows us
directly how it feels to be treated in that way. Are these accidents?
Is it an accident that we have consequences for our actions? Abso-
lutely not. With each decision and action, we face a consequence,
and that consequence teaches us.
More evolved species have increased intellectual abilities. As a re-
sult, the evolved species have greater capacities for learning. Simple
150
observation tells us that humans have the highest intellectual abili-

ties within our visible environment: we have greater awareness, giv-
ing us a greater capacity to learn.
We can use this also to measure the relative consciousness hierarchy
among the various organisms we see around us. We can teach
higher species how to cooperate with us, while lower creatures sim-
ply run from us in fear. We can teach a monkey to do things we
could not teach a dog to do. We can teach a dog to do things we
could not teach a mouse to do.
We can teach a rabbit to do things we could not teach a lizard to
do. We can see by the organism’s ability to learn and communicate
what level of consciousness that species has, and what stage of evo-
lution the conscious being within that body is at. As a result, we can
see a hierarchy among humans, animals, birds, fish, plants, and the
lower forms, with regard to the consciousness of the particular con-
scious beings inhabiting those particular physical forms.
An elephant could easily hurt a human being but since it displays a
greater consciousness, it has a greater capacity to cooperate with
humans. As a result, elephants have become great friends with hu-
mans, as have dolphins, horses, cows, and other more evolved ani-
mals.
The conscious beings in these species have the capability to learn
greater lessons with respect to the exchange of relationships than
insects or small fish might. An insect cooperating with a human, for
example, is simply not practical, as its consciousness is centered
around survival and fear.
Over recent years, some scientists have begun to accept that ani-
mals and plants display emotions just as humans do. A number of
studies have observed animals having many qualities thought previ-
ously to be exclusively human: honor, compassion, fairness, empa-
thy, envy, even morality.
For many years, most scientists assumed that animals had none of
these qualities. Many animals – including rats, dogs, monkeys, birds,
penguins, dolphins and others – have since been studied and ob-
151
served at length. Dolphins display complex behavior related to

helping their mates, even other species. Monkeys show complex
behavior associated with cooperating in the gathering and sharing
of food with less fortunate monkeys.
When playing, an older rat will allow a younger rat to win some-
times. When dogs play, they pretend to be angry but are careful not
to hurt their playmate. If they were to hurt their playmate, the
playmate would lose trust and may not play next time. These obser-
vations illustrate that living organisms have various levels of con-
sciousness, reflecting the conscious beings within.
We are all learning, growing and evolving throughout our lifetimes;
each learning at different rates. The bodies we dwell within change
as we grow and learn, and thus our bodies reflect our growth. While
the lower species are learning lessons that relate to survival and fear,
the higher species have greater capability to influence others, and
thus can learn lessons related to love and compassion; understand-
ing how our actions and decisions can affect others in a deeper way.
The Physical Body Reflects Level of Learning
Again, it is the conscious being within the body who is evolving. The
physical body each conscious being inhabits merely reflects this
evolution. Consider that each physical lifetime of each species al-
lows for a range of learning experiences at a specific level. Each of
these experiences teaches us various lessons, depending upon what
we need to learn.
The mind is an instrument that records sensual activities and assists
the conscious being in concocting various ways to attempt to enjoy
in the physical world. Because of these features, the mind reflects
the desires of the conscious being together with the various sensual
inputs.
For example, if we see a movie, that movie is now recorded into the
mind, and all of those images in the movie are now images the mind
holds. Because we desired to see the movie in the first place, the
recording reflects not just the images, but also the self’s desire to
see the movie.
152
Not only does the mind reflect every movie image, then. The mind
retains the initial concoction set up by the conscious being: I will
enjoy watching this movie. In this way, our minds have a combined data-
base of sensual images and the various concoctions we have devel-
oped – some of which have been achieved and some of which have
not. Those concoctions that have been achieved may provide learn-
ing experiences for us, providing some wisdom. However, those
concoctions that have not yet been achieved are quite dangerous.
They will shape our future bodies.
The instrument of the mind is incredibly precise in its ability to
record, yet we have conscious access to only part of it: the con-
scious mind. The unconscious part of the mind contains the re-
cordings and concoctions of everything we have ever experienced.
Because the mind contains both concoctions and images, the com-
bined status of our mind is the sum of our activities and desires.
Our gross physical body reflects this status of our mind. Therefore,
the contents of our mind will be reflected by the type of body we
have on: our concocted desires for sensual enjoyment combined
with our recorded sensual activities determine the kind of physical
senses we develop.
Thus, the types of physical characteristics we have now were deter-
mined by the characteristics of our mental status in the past. These
characteristics include our history of relationships, activities, and
desires. The mind can be considered the primary vehicle we travel
within throughout our journeys through the physical world: It car-
ries us through various experiences and lifetimes, all the while ac-
cumulating these experiences and concoctions, constantly reflecting
them through gross physical forms.
The Physical Body Reflects Consciousness
Consider how humans, after living with a particular animal such as a
dog or cat, may begin to take on physical features of the animal and
vice versa. As a result, many dog owners share similar features and
characteristics with their dogs. These outward similarities are a re-
sult of two basic elements: Initially the two conscious beings are
153
drawn to each other as they share common personality and physical

traits.
Then, as they spend time together – sharing emotions and commu-
nication – they both begin to take on some of the other’s manner-
isms and physical characteristics. The conscious beings we choose
to live around affect our consciousness while the body we wear reflects
our consciousness.
This is also apparent when observing couples who have been to-
gether for thirty, forty, or even fifty years of marriage. Over the
years of close proximity with each other, both gradually develop
similar mannerisms and lifestyles, which eventually become re-
flected in their physical features and activities.
They may begin to use similar language, walk similarly, have the
same physical build, and sometimes even begin to have similar facial
expressions. It is uncanny how our physical body, as it evolves dur-
ing this lifetime, becomes shaped around the consciousness of the
conscious beings we share time with.
Recently it was reported that human genes were surprisingly very
similar to those of dogs. This has created quite a stir among acci-
dental evolutionists who have attempted to explain this through the
accidental evolutionary theory.
The simple understanding for this related DNA lies in the fact that
the commingling of conscious beings in dog bodies and conscious
beings in human forms have mutually affected these conscious be-
ings’ physical shells and thus their DNA, due to their relationship
exchange. Dog bodies have become more human-like, and human
bodies have (unfortunately) become more dog-like over the genera-
tions. This of course, relates to the genetic/neurochemical research
on wolves and dogs we discussed earlier.
The Physical Body Reflects Past Choices
During our current lifetimes, our bodies and environments reflect
our previous actions. For example, a person who makes violent
choices – inflicting pain upon others – will typically develop physi-
154
cal features reflecting that mean, violent lifestyle. They may develop
strong arms and fists, and abilities to fight more efficiently.
They may also develop facial features such as mean eyes and scars,
effectively imparting fear upon any person who may challenge
them. In this way a violent person will physically reflect their prior
violence. A violent person will also eventually experience the pain
they inflicted upon others. They may be thrown in jail where other
violent people are, for example. This allows the violence they initi-
ated to be experienced.
Similarly, a person who wants to run fast over long distances may
develop, after years of training, a body resembling the build of a
greyhound, antelope, or racehorse. The physical body thus provides
the capabilities desired by the conscious being.
Likewise, a person who loves to overeat may take on physical char-
acteristics enabling further overeating, such as an extended stom-
ach. Physical changes thus reflect the conscious being’s desires and
activities, outwardly expressing the conscious being’s various at-
tempts to become happy in the temporary physical world.
Once the temporary physical body dies, if the conscious being has
continuing desires to become happy within the physical world, the
conscious being will become embodied into another physical body;
picking up where the last body left off; again perfectly reflecting
that living being’s consciousness and past activities.
Our Current Consciousness Determines Our Future
As the living being travels through the physical dimension, our ac-
tual consciousness is covered up by the accumulated physical relation-
ships, images, and concoctions. This creates what we will call the
covered consciousness. Our currently developed covered consciousness is
partly a reflection of the results of our actions and partly a reflection
of our various desires and goals.
In simpler terms, it is what we want combined with what we have done.
Our covered consciousness might be compared to a sort of dossier,
or file containing our track record of past activities together with
155
our desires and goals for existence. Assuming our goals remain fo-
cused on our own enjoyment within the physical world; this cov-
ered consciousness will shape our future physical environments and
physical forms, from the family and country we are born into, to
our body’s DNA arrangement.
As each of us progress through our lifetimes, our desires, activities
and relationships accumulate to develop particular tendencies. As
these tendencies gradually become reflected into physical attributes,
they will lead us to further tendencies. Just as a river moves along
the shore gathering the stems, leaves and branches of the plant
parts which fall into it, our physical forms gather the various effects
our choices and lifestyles have created.
As one physical body ages and becomes useless, the sum of our
covered consciousness will determine the next physical form we
embody. The sum of our covered consciousness at the time of
death will thus determine the next species we embody, the next
family we become a member of, and the next environment we will
live within.
The similarities between the various species therefore result from
the gradually changing consciousness of the living being. As our
tendencies gradually develop, reflecting our consciousness and prior
activities, we step from one physical form to another. Like a cascad-
ing river which winds and bends through a forest, one change typi-
cally yields another in the same direction, flowing with connected
behavior. This effect can also be seen in our current lifetimes as our
bodies gradually change through the years.
If we were to choose to live an animalistic life, focused upon eating,
sleeping, mating, and defending during our human lifetime, without
any development of higher consciousness and awareness; after our
human life we may first take on a higher form of animal species
most closely reflecting our consciousness. Then as those animalistic
tendencies develop further while in those forms, we may gradually
sink deeper into the lower species.
156
Meanwhile our prior concoctions to enjoy drive us further into sen-

sual activities, while our past activities drive us into fearful situa-
tions where we directly experience the effect our prior activities had
on others. In this way, we will directly and perfectly experience the
results of our choices and activities made when we had the greater
consciousness of a human form.
Should our focus remain attached to the accomplishments of the
human existence, after the death of this body we will transmigrate
to another human form, albeit in another family and environment.
Again, however, we will be put in an environment perfectly reflec-
tive of our decisions. Should we have been hurtful in a specific way
towards others, we will likely experience that same activity punished
upon our own bodies. Should we have aided others in particular
ways, we will likely be aided in that same way.
Remember the research by Dr. Ian Stevenson and others who
found that many children can accurately recall their previous life-
times.
During the interview process, Dr. Stevenson found that quite often
the subject described in detail a previous lifetime as a particular
historical person, describing events which occurred at that time
with a clarity and experience only possible from having been per-
sonally in that situation.
The research did not stop there however. Dr. Stevenson and associ-
ate researchers then researched the historical accuracy of the ac-
count to confirm whether 1) the subject could have known these
facts otherwise; and 2) whether the facts can be confirmed as being
historically accurate.
Dr. Stevenson also observed that many children also had birth
marks located almost precisely the location where their fatal wound
was inflicted in their previous lifetime.
For example, he found cases where children recalled being hung or
strangled to death having birth marks around their neck. He also
157
found children recalling being stabbed somewhere having birth-

marks precisely where they recalled being stabbed to death.
Dr. Stevenson and others also noticed that certain phobias were
sometimes connected with how the subject died in their previous
lifetime.
Dr. Stevenson’s research along with others indicate that past life
recollection fades by about age seven. Before that age, children will
often speak spontaneously about their previous lives as historical
individuals, recalling historical details decades’ old and otherwise
unknowable.
The evidence presented by these scientific explorations, combined
with genetic research is clear: Throughout our physical lives, as our
consciousness changes as a result of the learning experiences the
physical world puts in front of us, our bodies evolve. Then once we
leave these physical bodies, assuming we are not complete in our
learning, we will take on another body according to our conscious-
ness at the time of death.
After we work through the dilemmas and challenges of this physical
lifetime, we transition to other physical embodiments to continue
our lessons.
The physical world is primarily a place of education. Here we thor-
oughly educated. Our lessons are typically related to relationships
and love. Here we are taught that when we hurt others, we get hurt.
When we help others, we get helped. These lessons essentially show
us how it feels: They are, in other words, lessons of consequence, in
order to each us how our actions affect others.
In order to teach these lessons, the physical world escorts us
through personalized lesson plans, each of which is designed to
graduate us - if we pass them - to the next level of learning. Should
we not learn the current lesson, we are either presented with the
same lesson in different ways so we have a chance to learn it again,
or we are demoted down to a previous lesson, so we can learn that
one again, and hopefully that will bring us to the next lesson, which
we can then learn.
158
We could compare this with grade school, which graduates children

from one grade to the next after learning the lessons each grade has
to offer. If the child doesn't learn the lessons of a grade, they are
kept back until they do.
The school of the physical world, however, is much more precise
and personalized. The "grades" are phases in life and situations, as
well as different species.
So how does the variation of species connect to this? The human
species teaches lessons of higher learning, while the other species –
depending upon their level – teach more fundamental lessons.
As we climb up the species ladder, we learn many basic lessons,
often relating to decisions we made during our more conscious
former lifetime within a human body.
Just consider, for example, a person whose consciousness was so
dark that he only thought of himself, and considered others as ob-
jects of his enjoyment. So he hurts others, abuses others, even kills
others during his human lifetime – a lifetime where he had signifi-
cant choice. What is needed to rehabilitate such an individual?
First the person needs to recognize that there are others outside of
himself, and that he isn't the only person who exists. He also needs
to realize what it feels like to be hurt, because he has hurt so many
others. This person is a candidate for a lower species of life who is
subjected to being attacked by others.
Let's say this person takes on the body of a rat. As the wild beasts
of the field - the wolves, cats, hawks and so on - attack, the person
it taught what it feels like to be attacked by those who have more
power.
In addition to this fundamental lesson, this species will have a close
family, and the mama rat will protect her babies against attack for
awhile. This teaches the person that we need others. We can't do it
alone. Then the baby rat grows up and becomes a mama rat. As a
mama, she also protects her babies. In this way, she learns not only
that she needs others, but that others need her.
159
In other words, the person begins to learn about caring for others
and others caring for us. This part of our education process is a
foundation element. It is like the house that requires a strong foun-
dation.
Just as in any education, our education requires us to have a strong
foundation. In terms of the transcendental conscious being, this
means understanding the nature of love, compassion, care and nur-
turing. Why? Because this is part of our rehabilitation process for
returning to the spiritual dimension.
As we graduate up the 'grades' and evolve spiritually once within the
human form, we begin to learn 'post-graduate' lessons, such as how
to care and nurture others who are less fortunate, or from lower
species. We begin to learn the finer lessons of love, such as how to
serve someone that we are superior in position to, and how to re-
main humble even when others admire us or need us.
The Responsibility of the Human Species
With the human form’s higher level of awareness comes greater
responsibility. The human form brings the conscious being greater
responsibility because of an enhanced ability to determine morality.
Future shells we may embody after the death of this human form
will be determined by the actions we take while in this human form.
Tendencies towards cruelty and pain in the human form can thus
send that conscious being into an entire array of vicious physical
forms, starting with vicious animal species, followed or preceded by
a descent into bodies of weaker animal species that in turn are eaten
by other vicious organisms.
In this way, we will not only become embodied into organisms re-
flecting our consciousness, but we will directly experience the re-
sults of activities made during our responsible lifetimes. The
mechanism is designed perfectly, allowing direct learning experi-
ences for actions taken during aware lifetimes.
Likewise, choices we make in kindness to others will be reflected
into progressive lifetimes of greater consciousness and responsibil-
160
ity. Just as a worker who performs his job steadily and honestly is
rewarded by promotion, the conscious being who proves to be re-
sponsible during aware lifetimes gains higher awareness, leading to
greater transcendental growth.
The human form has the potential of greater intelligence. With
greater intelligence comes a greater opportunity for decision-making
and the ability to solve the problems of life. Seeking the transcen-
dental solution to life’s questions can lead to our ultimate exit out
of physical embodiment. This opportunity comes with greater re-
sponsibility as well.
For example, a person who holds the position of captain of a ship
has the authority to change the direction of the ship. Therefore, the
captain retains the responsibility for the ship’s course. If the ship
crashes into a rock, it is the captain who is held responsible. He was
the person who ultimately had the ability to direct a change in
course.
This is part of the laws of nature, and human society recognizes
those laws by instinct. In the same way that we hold our leaders to
higher standards, animals do the same. Groups of wolves, for ex-
ample, will choose a leader who then must periodically be tested.
His ability to lead requires a higher level of abilities. If they didn’t
have these higher abilities, they would not be subject to periodic
testing by other wolves who seek the leadership position.
While animals must follow the laws of nature and do so by instinct,
humans are given a higher level of awareness. This is a greater
awareness of the effects that we have upon others, combined with
the ability to discern between right and wrong; and a greater under-
standing for the consequences of our actions.
Humans are also given greater intellectual abilities, producing the
capability to realize our transcendental identities.
Awareness can either be utilized or abused. With the capability of
awareness comes responsibility. A person wanting to escape aware-
ness, for example, might drink, take drugs, or escape into sensual
activities. These actions will allow a person to gradually lose the
161
ability to be aware. This will eventually lead to taking on physical

forms that allow more forgetfulness. Unfortunately, the byproduct of
these physical forms is that the being’s consciousness will be geared
towards the struggle for physical survival. The opportunity for
higher awareness will be gone, being replaced by an overwhelming
fear of pain and death.
Our Current Choices Predict our Future
The choices we make while in the human form of life have a great
impact upon our future direction simply because we are more aware
of the consequences of those choices. Should we choose to ignore
this awareness, then the depth of our slide into the various species
of life will rely upon our various activities and lifestyle choices.
The decisions we make when we have more awareness and thus a
greater understanding of the consequences will have an impact
upon us for many lifetimes in the future. This is to promote learn-
ing. While many of us pride our human species for having the abil-
ity to make moral and ethical decisions, we must understand that
should we misuse this ability, we will lose it.
Those lower species that do not have these abilities are not merely
ignorant creatures; they are unfortunate conscious beings who have
in the past chosen not to utilize those abilities when they had them.
Thus, they have to learn through experience when they could have
had those realizations when they had greater awareness.
This is a common scenario during our everyday lives as well: Often
parents tell their teenage children that if they do not listen and learn
now, they will be forced to learn those lessons through the school of
hard knocks. For example, a parent may tell a child not to steal, but if
the child doesn’t listen and learn from that, then they will end up
being arrested for stealing and learning the hard way that they
shouldn’t steal.
The depth and path of one’s gradual decline into the lower crea-
tures is determined by the choices the conscious being made during
any lifetime in which there was the ability to understand moral con-
sequences. As a result, conscious beings who chose to be cruel as
162
humans – inflicting pain upon others – will be carried through

enough painful lifetimes to work off the suffering they chose to in-
flict when they had the moral understanding to make a choice. The
lower life forms give the conscious being the opportunity to reap
the results of those actions, all the while learning lessons that gradu-
ally accumulate, resulting in greater awareness of proper action.
Once a person has descended through enough forms to work off
their past deeds and choices, they again may have the chance to rise
through the life forms and arrive at another human lifetime. Each
successive life form offers positive learning experiences to allow for
another chance to evolve ones awareness. The conscious being may
have another opportunity to become embodied into a conscious
human body.
The human form gives the conscious being another rare shot at
developing greater awareness and the ability to redevelop our tran-
scendental actual consciousness. Should the conscious being begin the
path towards transcendental awareness while in a human form and
not achieve complete success, they may take on another human
form in order to continue that path. Should they reject the path
towards greater consciousness, their journey may again descend into
the lower species.
This descent and evolution through gross physical forms can be
extremely difficult for the conscious being – enduring many fright-
ful experiences through many lifetimes. Unmistakably, the path
through the lower species of life is a hellish existence, and the loop
can involve thousands of lifetimes enduring physical discomfort,
varying degrees of distress and constant threats from other organ-
isms.
In the better case, evolving into another human form will give the
conscious being another shot at transcendental awareness. This is
not a matter to take lightly though. Our advice is to seek and try to
complete transcendental awareness in this lifetime, while the oppor-
tunity is available.
163
The Real ‘Natural selection’

It is this gradual descent or evolution of the conscious being
through the species that creates the physical similarities between
one species and another. As the conscious being gradually evolves
or devolves through the species, each physical form displays a simi-
larity to the previous physical form the conscious being inhabited.
As Darwin saw this similarity between species, he could not help
but think that there was some evolutionary system and some kind
of natural selection going on. It is certainly true that we are in essence
selecting our next physical forms by our current choices.
Our natural selection process might be compared with the changing of
ones clothes. Before changing clothes, we must decide what kinds
of clothes are needed for the day. Consideration of the desired tasks
to accomplish will determine which clothes will be chosen, to the
limit of ones wardrobe.
A business meeting in a corporate environment might require a grey
suit with a standard tie or a conservative dress. A casual day at work
may require jeans and a Hawaiian shirt. If one is working in the
garden, overalls and a t-shirt might suffice. Ultimately, the decision
is based upon what is needed to accomplish that day, combined
with how one wants to appear.
Once a decision is made, ones current clothes are quickly changed,
but through several steps. The shirt might come off first, leaving
the undershirt, pants and socks. Once the undershirt is taken off,
the new shirt can be put on. Then the old pants and underwear will
have to come off before new pants can be put on. Eventually one
will make the complete change, but a number of graduated steps
will be required.
In this same way, we step through the preparation for physical
changes in a graduated way. But upon transmigration, we will as-
sume multiple changes at once. Still, each new form is similar to the
previous form – making stepped changes in features and manner-
isms. These changes all take place through design, yet they are ulti-
164
mately determined by the conscious decisions we make while in

forms of greater awareness.
Note that we are not talking the intelligent design theory here. Some
accidental evolutionists argue that one of the faults of the intelligent
design theory is that there seem to be many imperfections and
shortcomings among the species. They report of theoretical ugliness
evident in the various physical forms. What intelligence would have de-
signed these flaws? they challenge.
This is not a problem for the evolution of the conscious process because
the living being’s own consciousness creates the flaws in our physical
forms. Imperfect physical forms merely reflect the imperfections of
the conscious being’s misidentified and erroneous quests for happi-
ness. While this is still part of the ultimate design of the universe,
we might say our lack of intelligence created the flaws we must face.
And those very flaws are actually part of the lessons we must learn.
The ultimate design is perfect. Our self-centered ugliness comes
back to us in the form of ugliness that we must then manage. And
during our management, we hopefully learn about our own ugliness.
The Source of Instinct
For centuries, science has been trying to figure out why animals and
even humans are born with instinctive behavior. Instinctively we
trust our family members. Instinctively we fear outsiders. Instinc-
tively we search for food and struggle to survive.
The fact is all creatures have instinct because all living organisms are
driven by an experienced conscious being. Each conscious being has
lived prior to being born into that physical body. Because we existed prior
to being born into our current body, we have accumulated various
survival tactics learned from previous lifetimes.
These survival tactics will not necessarily be consciously remem-
bered by the physical mind, but they will nevertheless enable us to
instinctively coordinate basic activities of survival. These are com-
bined with tools taught by current parents, siblings and peers, along
165
with the inner guidance system transmitted directly from the Su-
preme Being.
Since our current physical forms were developed based upon our
past lifetimes, our current physical forms are synchronized perfectly
to reflect our incremental growth or descent. The family we are
born into, the beings surrounding us and the environment we’re
embodied into all flow naturally from the point we left off in the
previous embodiment.
This is why family and friends may seem so familiar to us: We tend
to rejoin the conscious beings we have become attached to. This is
why we should be wisely choose our attachments and relationships
in this world. Should we become attached to a conscious being who
is heading downward into the species, we may follow them.
Purpose and Predestination
What is the purpose of this evolution of the conscious being? Why
are our tendencies and past deeds determining the particular type of
bodies we manifest? Why do we struggle to survive through so
many lifetimes?
As to the root cause of the desire to survive: Because the conscious
being is transcendental and thus ageless, yet trapped inside a physi-
cal body, the struggle for survival is a basic response to misidentifi-
cation. As the eternal conscious being mistakenly identifies with the
physical shell, the illusion that physical death will threaten our exis-
tence is reinforced. We conscious beings, outside our natural ele-
ment and stuck inside a temporary body can easily mistakenly iden-
tify ourselves with the body through the subtle facility of the false
ego.
The process of the evolution of the conscious points to the existence of
an ultimate purpose for our existence. What are we evolving for or
towards?
Often people will debate the concept of predestination. Many propose
that our destinies are predetermined and our paths are already cho-
sen. It is true that our current situation has been determined by the
166
activities and choices we have made in the past. However, our fu-
ture path will be determined by our current choices. These we have
control over.
We have the ultimate ability to determine our futures. Our future is
thus in our hands. While there is a design interwoven into existence
that enables specific choices to have particular results, we can cus-
tomize those results with customized choices.
This is because, ultimately, the purpose of the evolution of the conscious
is to teach us. If there was no flexibility built in to the design, the
only lesson we would learn is that we were trapped.
The conscious being also moves through various stages of learning
through various lifetimes, hopefully graduating to a point where we
realize what we are being taught and why.
As we have all experienced, a great process of learning is direct ex-
perience, but the wisest way of learning is experience combined
with learning through the advice of an expert. We can all repeatedly
learn through the school of hard knocks that something is not good for
us. We may not learn exactly why that something is not good for us
from mere experience though. If we should understand from an
expert why something is not good for us, we should be able to
graduate through the lesson without experiencing it repeatedly. Our
experiences will thus be reinforced with wisdom.
Our learning is ultimately measured by the choices we make. Should
we again make bad choices, even though we’ve had the appropriate
experiences and even learned why, then we are required to return to
the direct experiences, which teach those lessons. Should we learn
from those experiences along with wise counsel, and we follow up
that learning by making the right choices, we effectively learn what
the world is teaching us.
167
Chapter Five
The Programming of DNA

According to the current evolution theory, evolution is based upon
DNA mutations allowing for successive changes upon species.
Even a cursory understanding of computer programming tells us
that DNA is a program. Today's computer programming uses the
binary code: A series of 1s and 0s that arranged in sequences of bits
and bites. These sequences create instructional codes also referred
to as computer machine language.
Instead of a binary system, the DNA programming code of the
natural world uses a quaternary (4) programming code. His system
utilizes sugar/phosphate nucleotide backbones, with each
sugar/phosphate on the chain attached to one of four amino bases:
Either adenine (A), cytosine (C), guanine (G) or thymine (T). This
creates what is called a "base pair" combination.
A modern computer binary system contains bits composed of ei-
ther a 1 or a 0, and a byte with a sequence of eight bits (such as
10011010). A "word" in this system contains a series of bytes. Na-
ture’s DNA programming code contains base pairings of either A,
C, G or T (equivalent to bits), with a normal "byte" size of three -
called a codon. For example, a codon could be AGC, ATC, TAG,
and so on.
This four-bit, three-byte DNA system creates an extensive array of
possible bytes, and these are assembled into gigantic "word" se-
quences. For example, a typical chromosome will contain over 220
million codons!
Just as a complex computer program is programmed by a conscious
person with a purpose and objective for the program, the pro-
gramming evident within DNA also illustrates the purpose and ob-
jectives of a complex program.
Furthermore, simply by examining the exacting mathematical calcu-
lations of physicists, we can know that balanced equality (an equa-
tion means both sides of the equal sign are equal) exists among
natural elements. What renders this complex balance? What renders
169
the various programs evident among not only DNA, but among the
species, groups of species and the various elements of nature?
Since DNA is an extremely complex and highly organized pro-
gramming platform with extreme functionality that puts any mod-
ern computer program to shame, we know that this coding also had
to originate from a place of purpose and objective.
Where does this purpose and objective come from? Why does the
physical world teach a myriad of lessons?
The Singularity Problem
The big bang theory states that billions of years ago there was noth-
ing: no life, no planets, just a mixture of hot gasses and particles.
Suddenly from a combination of supposedly unstable, volatile gases,
very hot temperatures arose. For no particular reason, at some point
in time there was a gigantic accidental nuclear explosion, sending
various rocks flying in all directions. From this supposed fireball,
some rocks that flew out began to slowly cool, and others stayed lit.
Cooler rocks began circling some of the still-burning rocks.
Out of this magical accident and subsequent re-gathering of spheri-
cally- and elliptically-shaped rocks, our particular universe suppos-
edly and randomly assembled into the unique and beautiful sun and
planet arrangements we have today. All these various rocks some-
how randomly settled into separate solar systems, accidentally form-
ing precise elliptical patterns. Bunches of these solar systems some-
how connected together to form galaxies of accidentally formed
spirals with spiral arms.
Somehow, the multitude of galaxies and solar systems aligned acci-
dentally into precise elliptical or spiral formations throughout space.
All the various stars aligning our beautiful nighttime skies are acci-
dentally providing us with navigational aids and interesting ephem-
eris positions. Somehow one big accidental explosion did all of this.
The proposed chemistry within the supposed initial gas cloud (or
‘membranes’) and the resulting amazingly gigantic nuclear explosion
170
is quite complex. It is also beside the point. The critical questions

relate to the source of the initial nuclear explosion:
- Where did these initial chemical elements necessary for that first explosion –
whether atoms, strings or membranes – come from?
- Where did the initial energy necessary for the fusion or fission reactions among
these initial elements creating the potential for such a gigantic theoretical explo-
sion come from?
Scientists characterize these questions as part of the ‘Singularity Prob-
lem.’
Although modern science has observed many chemical reactions,
never have we seen a new element or subatomic particle spontane-
ously come into existence. We have seen elements combine to form
what we think are new molecular structures. We have observed
supposedly new molecules forming when we combine different
elements. We have also observed elements become isotopes after
bombarding them with subatomic particles.
Nevertheless, we have never seen a new element suddenly come
into existence, nor do we know how and when the original elements
were created. We also have no idea how the theoretical building
blocks – the electrons, neutrons and so on – came into existence.
Was it a Big Accident?
Interestingly enough, this is what some scientists unfortunately
seem to be proposing. They seem to be proposing that all of the
multilayered, synchronized, and sequenced activities and elements
of nature are all random accidental occurrences. They seem to pro-
pose that all of our intellectual abilities – all of our tendencies to
think, communicate, love, learn, etc. – are accidental occurrences.
They seem to propose all this somehow developed without reason
or purpose.
We are being asked to believe that in this white room of a universe,
everything living came into existence spontaneously from non-life.
All of the varied species of life, bringing forth unique personality,
171
emotion and a striving for survival, all originated from an accidental

freak accident.
Obviously, the sane person would assume that the food was pre-
pared outside the room. People outside the room obviously came in
while she was sleeping and brought the food, the table, and the
silverware. A sane person would conclude that these people must
be caring for her in some way. She might also assume that she was
put in this room for a reason. She might guess that she was being
rehabilitated for something. Maybe she did something crazy or hurt
someone.
Unfortunately, modern science has seemingly concluded on this
accidental origin hypothesis. It appears that modern science is not
even offering possible alternatives for consideration. The conclu-
sion has been drawn, the papers have been published, and the text-
books have been distributed.
Modern science has seemingly concluded two hypothetical assump-
tions: The first being that the universe began with an accidental
large explosion called the ‘big bang.’ The second assumption is being
that life descended from an accidental combination of chemicals
arising from a ‘primordial soup’ of some sort. These two theories are
assumed in scientific literature across the disciplines.
They are generally assumed as factual. From textbooks to news
media, these once radical and rejected theories are now being ac-
cepted as fundamental foundations upon which other theories are
laid. Not even a century ago, these theories were considered bold
and controversial – even crazy by most of the science institution.
Yet now these theories have become integral in the development of
newer theories on everything from archeology to genetics.
No Scientific Evidence
Neither of these theories has any solid evidence, however. To the
contrary, these theories deal with issues so gigantic; with time fac-
tors so expansive, that humans have little ability to collect definite
evidence, let alone supply controlled data.
172
The tiny mind of a human with its tiny scope of sense perception is
simply no match for this task. Even the relatively sophisticated ra-
dio telescopes and other relatively advanced machinery we may
launch into outer space does not establish clear evidence of life’s
origin. None of the information provided from all this research
conclusively proves either theory.
Yet amazingly, these accidental-event scientists (as we will call those who
postulate these theories) speak of these hypotheses with no hint
they are speculative and thus could easily be wrong. This is the real
crime in the promulgation of science and the advancement of
knowledge.
A rather flimsy piece of information accidental-event scientists
seem to rest their ‘big bang’ thesis on is the direction matter appears
to be traveling through space.
This is called the Hubble Constant. Apparently, rocks and meteors
appear to be traveling in one direction. Accidental-event scientists
propose that this direction is outward from a theoretical center.
Supposedly this indicates everything is traveling away from one
point of origin. It is speculated that this origin point is the big bang.
Again, it is assumed that everything is flying away from the center
only because these rocks are all seemingly moving in one direction.
This observation has been made without a clarity of which point in
the universe is truly the center however. The trajectories are not
quite so simple because there are so many other potential gravita-
tional and magnetic effects.
Our galaxy appears to be a gigantic spiral with several arms, and we
see among the distance stars many other apparent galaxies. Where is
this theoretical center? Accidental-event scientists cannot pinpoint
the center because they do not know where the center is. Maybe it
is towards direction of the stream of matter, or maybe it is away
from it. Our range of perception is simply too small to know this
for certain.
Most accidental-event scientists will admit we have little under-
standing of the width and breadth of the universe. While we can see
173
distant galaxies, and it appears that our particular solar system is

part of a galaxy (the Milky Way), we do not know how many galax-
ies there are.
Some of the galaxies we see through our telescopes are so tiny that
it is perfectly conceivable that there are numerous galaxies beyond
the range of our senses. The bottom line is these scientists are
merely making bold guesses based on incomplete information. Ac-
cidental-event scientists have no idea how big the physical universe
actually is and what is actually out there.
Over recent years, physicists have continued to add new speculative
postulations onto these in an attempt to explain the details behind
these accidental creation theories. We note a number of theories
such as the ‘string theories’ and the ‘membrane theory’ (or ‘M theory’) have
recently been postulated. These ruminations propose that the uni-
verse was once composed of membranes or strings, and their colli-
sions might be the basis for the big bang. These theories again as-
sume a random, meaningless, and accidental creation. They assume
no design, no purpose, and no intention. And recently, the ‘parallel
universe theory’ has gained attention.
In general, modern science’s theories on the origins of the universe
and life appear to be founded upon three basic assumptions: 1)
events of the universe are accidental; 2) the human senses have the
capacity to perceive the true nature of the universe; and 3) there is
no design, controlling, or organizing source of existence.
Where did the ‘Big Bang’ Particles come from?
Since the supposed gigantic big bang explosion required a precise
volatility among then-existing nuclear units, these nuclear units
would have had to be in existence before such a bang. Moreover, if
the nuclear elements we observe today are arranged with precise
molecular properties now, what would be the rationale in supposing
they arose from chaos in the past? What accidental force suddenly
created the beautiful orbital molecular structures we can observe
today?
174
If these original subatomic units contained enough nuclear energy

to create such an incredible explosion, these original elements must
have somehow contained and stored such incredible energy. To
retain and release energy, any molecule, atom or particle must first
acquire it. Where did these original elements obtain their capability to
acquire and store so much energy?
The big bang theory was founded upon the observations of chemi-
cal and nuclear explosions observed in laboratories and in space. As
scientists have traced these explosions, it appears that they proceed
along a systematic cascading reaction.
The reaction requires an assembly of atomic elements that react in a
chain-like process. This process is hardly a chaotic process. Rather,
it is systematic and step-like. Where did these original nuclear ele-
ments come from and how did they come to be arranged in such a
way as to allow for such a dramatically gigantic explosion?
Theoretical physicists appropriately call this the ‘Singularity Problem.’
In a nutshell, this is the problem of not knowing what existed prior
to the supposed big bang.
Nuclear Energy and the Big Bang
If atoms and subatomic units retain a common energy eventually be
released, there must be an initial source of the energy. The common
energy driving subatomic particle motion also appears to hold them
into precise orbital patterns. These nuclear forces – which have
been broken down into various components by quantum physics –
appear to be necessary for both holding atoms and molecules to-
gether as well as providing the energy for such an explosion.
Where did these energies originate prior to the supposed big bang?
This means not only would a source of the energy have been re-
quired; but also such a source would have had to exist prior to this
supposed creation.
Heat and energy are released in an explosive fire. Like any fire, an
explosion must have available combustible elements for consump-
tion and an energy source for ignition. In other words, the big bang
175
must have had an ignition source, enough energy to push forward

such an explosion, and something combustible to burn. Where did
this ignition come from, where did the energy come from and
where did the combustible elements come from for such a monu-
mental bang?
Modern theoretical physicists and cosmologists twirl technical jar-
gon around like skilled jugglers. They try to substantiate their specu-
lations, avoiding the basic problem of something coming from
nothing. Note that there have been hundreds of different theories
documented to explain the nuclear and chemical process. Among
those are the ‘string’ and ‘membrane’ theories mentioned above.
This latest theory has the big bang elements created initially by a
random crashing of ‘membranes’ into each other. This theoretical
membrane crash somehow produced all the elements for the explo-
sion. Assuming these chaotic strings or membranes could somehow
create the precise dynamics of nuclear physics, the singularity ques-
tion remains: Where did the membranes or strings come from and
where did they get their energy from?
The bottom line is, regardless of which terminology is used, the
nuclear gas big bang theory, the membrane big bang theory cannot
explain the existence of the initial energy, nor can it explain the
creation of the initial elements required for such an explosion to
occur. As the classical Law of Conservation of Energy states; energy is
never lost or created in an explosion or process. Energy can be
transformed to another state, but an original energy must be present
to convert to explosive energy. This would mean any potential en-
ergy available to cause such a huge bang event would have had to
have originally existed prior to such an event.
Over the past few years, some cosmologists have proposed that
recently discovered ‘gamma ray bursts’ emulate the big bang scenario.
The hypothesis is that a neutron star is formed through a grand
explosion, followed by a short-lived existence and an eventual im-
plosion into a black hole. Although these gamma ray bursts are far
from understood, cosmologists insist their substantial energy emis-
sions supposedly created by these ‘star births’ come from nothing.
176
Then of course, when these dark stars implode into theoretical

black holes, all that energy, along with surrounding matter, suppos-
edly also disappears into nothing.
Energy with enough potential to create these sorts of tremendous
explosions and implosions would certainly require a powerful
source. The energy must come from somewhere, and in the case of
black holes, must go somewhere. If the source of the energy existed
prior to the explosion then we could hardly claim the universe was
created by a bang.
Where did this energy come from? We would have to concede that
a source of energy existed prior to any such explosion if indeed it
took place. Such an explosion, if it did take place, would have had
to have been an event further down the line from creation. If such a
theoretical explosion took place after the elements and energy was
created, then the big bang could not have been the event of crea-
tion.
The Precision of Atomic Energy
An atom is a precise and balanced unit made of various subatomic
particles, seemingly held together by another force outside our percep-
tion. As physicists are still debating over whether subatomic particles
are indeed particles or waves, we will call them wave-particles.
These wave-particles are termed subatomic because they are parts
of the atom, just as planets are part of a particular solar system. At
the atomic level, physicists like Neil Bohr theorized in the early
twentieth century that atoms have systematic valences, or orbital re-
gions that accommodate these electromagnetic wave-particles pro-
pelling around an atomic nucleus.
A covalent region is an area of space where observations indicate it
is statistically likely that region will contain a subatomic particle.
(Note that no one has ever really seen an electron.) This nucleus
supposedly has a positive charge while the subatomic electrons
theoretically have negative charges.
Early nuclear physicists told us that these opposite charges some-
how have repulsion and attraction forces keeping the atom to-
177
gether. Meanwhile each type of atom – each element in nature such

as hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen – somehow developed a unique yet
precise arrangement of subatomic particles, giving each element
unique properties such as molecular mass, boiling points and so on.
Each atomic element also was found to display a unique electro-
magnetic frequency.
In the decades following the development of the atomic theory,
various studies have been performed to watch how atoms and par-
ticles respond as they are collide or are bombarded. Through these
experiments, physicists have observed a tremendous stability and
balance exist between the subatomic particles within an atom.
As a whole, the quanta – or particle characteristics – are extremely
cohesive and intricate. What makes them so intricate and precise?
While nuclear physicists speak of chaotic beginnings, the result is a
series of rigid and quantifiable rules of engagement between these
wave-particles.
Could such a precise arrangement, which keeps these smaller parts
organized with their larger parts, be accidental? These quantifiable
units are theoretically the building blocks of matter. What actually
makes these units so precise and organized are again, forces outside our
perception: Forces precise enough to allow these units to become
perfectly aligned in countless numbers, elegantly arranging the geo-
metric structures we see around us: Precise enough to render con-
sistent, predictable and measurable properties.
Atoms combine in a synchronized manner to form the various
moving and functioning structures around us. Modern physicists
tell us that atoms are uniquely designed to sometimes become ionic,
allowing them to then join one another by sharing subatomic parti-
cles within mutual orbital regions.
In other words, via forces outside our perception, atoms are brought to-
gether into an assembly of precise sequences we refer to as mole-
cules. The atoms of a molecule are bound together in such a way
that they lose their independent characteristics.
178
Together they display completely different features. Just as modern

scientists do not understand what is holding the subatomic wave-
particles together within and around an atom, they do not under-
stand what brings ions into molecules. Though complex terms have
been ascribed to these forces – such as ‘small and weak nuclear forces’ –
modern science does not actually understand these forces or their
source. Modern science also does not understand why atoms come
together to form molecules with such precision.
Bonds between atoms can form various shapes, resulting in distinct
and measurable designs and structures. Molecular bonding can take
on linear, trigonal planar, trigonal bipyramidal, octahedral and many
other uniformly balanced and symmetrical structures.
These various bonding patterns form molecules, which will stack
together into crystalline or lattice structures to form still greater
complexes of three dimensional shapes such as snowflakes, glaciers,
diamonds and every other object we perceive around us.
As we observe the various structures molecules combine to form,
again we see tremendous precision and quantification. Each type of
molecule in nature displays distinct, precise, measurable, and consis-
tent characteristics. For this reason, a chemistry professor can con-
fidently draw an outline of the shape of a particular molecule occur-
ring in nature.
And due to this, each and every molecule in nature has unique
quantifiable characteristics. Although every molecule is distinct,
groups of the same molecules also show precise and exact proper-
ties. Each has a unique melting point. Each has a unique boiling
point. Each has a unique specific gravity, density, viscosity, surface
resistance, osmotic pressure, equilibrium, solubility, and neutrality.
Furthermore, molecules within different states form have different
characteristics. Solid molecular forms display precisely distinct melt-
ing points, tension, height, width, mass, and shape. Gas molecular
forms will display precisely distinct vaporization points, pressure,
volume, molar mass, and even precise kinetic particle speeds. Each
type of molecular arrangement, whether it is liquid, solid or gas, has
179
precisely distinct and consistently quantifiable measurements for

each of these characteristics.
This means that every glass of pure water under the same condi-
tions will have the same surface tension, and every block of pure ice
will have a particular lattice structure with a particular strength and
cohesion. As these molecular substances are arranged in nature,
each has a distinctly precise, predictable, and measurable structure
and characteristics, which change predictably with environmental
changes.
This quantifiable precision among atomic elements appears with
any molecular combination, allowing scientists to catalog and iden-
tify each type of element and molecular substance by its distinct
characteristics. Countless molecules combine to form structures or
solutions, yet they are all so organized that each type can be meas-
ured, catalogued and identified. These specifications are consistent
from the smallest groupings to the largest volumes of the substance.
The Sequential Elements
th
The 19 century Russian chemist Dimitri Mendeleev – given the
distinction as the formulator of the chemical periodic table of ele-
ments – is said to have realized the periodic table one day as he
awoke from a dream. Today the basic structure of this table is still
used.
The precise arrangement of the table of elements within the table
follows each element’s unique atomic number, weight and position
relative to other elements. The natural groupings of the table dis-
play a commonality among elements in the same region of the table,
despite have significantly greater atomic mass and number.
Mendeleev’s table, formulated before many of the quantifications
on the elements were made, accurately predicted elements that were
in that day unknown. The existence of such a precisely structured
table of elements arranged by atomic number and weight illustrates
how nature, even to the tiniest subatomic particle, is sequentially
arranged.
180
Despite our inability to physically observe or comprehend the sub-

atomic particles and their various forces, we can indirectly see the
absolute precision of the design and repetitive nature of the peri-
odic table.
Scientists have observed events indicating that each orbit of an
atom must hold tremendous energy. Furthermore, it has been ob-
served that each atom has a specific electromagnetic frequency
within the bonds holding its subatomic particles together. Along
with this energy specification, observations have suggested that
atoms and molecules also release precise amounts of energy when
these bonds are broken and particles or atoms are released.
Scientists have shown that this released subatomic and molecular
energy can create the potential for explosive forces. When energy is
released sequentially from a large number of atoms or molecules at
once, tremendous explosive forces have been observed. The exam-
ple of the atomic bomb comes to mind. Again, scientists do not
understand the underlying causes for these powerful forces outside our
perception, and thus struggle to describe their origin.
Subatomic Particles have Memory
A Japanese university mass accelerator study resulted in a stunning
observation in the late 1970s: tiny subatomic particles would – once
they were torn away from an atom through bombardment – appar-
ently return to the same atom they departed from.
While there were millions if not billions of seemingly identical and
closer particle-hungry ionic-atoms available to assume the particle in
the medium, each particle would somehow remember their origin.
In 1982, a physics research team led by Dr. Alain Aspect at the
University of Paris determined that subatomic particles could in-
stantaneously communicate with one another somehow. Though
some were separated by relatively long distances, they were able to
signal each other. Although these studies were soon forgotten, the
results illustrate a deeper mechanism and design within the smallest
elements of nature.
181
The memory of molecules was confirmed by the work of a medical

doctor named Jacques Benveniste, M.D. Former research director
at the French National Institute for Health and Medical Research
(INSERM), Dr. Benveniste’s career was very distinguished, having
been credited with the discovery of the platelet-activating factor.
During experiments on the immune system, Dr. Benveniste and his
research technician Elisabeth Davenas inadvertently observed the
activity of the basophils despite dilution levels so low it was doubt-
ful any molecules of the biochemical remained in the solution. Over
a four-year period of continual trials, showing repeated confirma-
tion while instituting further controls, Dr. Benveniste and his re-
search team concluded some sort of molecular memory of the sub-
stance was retained after dilution.
Dr. Benveniste’s research became controversial. Particle and sub-
stance memory had vast implications in the study of medicine and
our knowledge of physics. Still, Dr. Benveniste, until his death in
2004, along with other researchers, confirmed these findings con-
clusively (Bastide et al. 1987; Youbicier-Simo et al. 1993; Endler et al.
1994; Smith 1994; Pongratz et al. 1995; Benveniste et al. 1992).
Even if we disregard this research, we can see that all substances
have a form of design, which can translate to memory structure.
This is why water retains its liquid structure and mercury retains its
structure.
We already know each element remembers a particular type of elec-
tromagnetic bonding pattern, a specific boiling point, freezing
point, melting point, and so on. A substance retains these character-
istics despite rigorous environmental and time challenges. This
memory system indicates a larger governing factor within the elec-
tromagnetic bonds of atoms and molecules. This memory basis is at
the very root of the Bohr atom, with its valence orbitals filling out
to a distinct number.
As we investigate orbital bonding angles and orbital shell counts
among molecules, we find that these quanta and bonding angles are
distinct unless the atom comes into contact with a greater force of
182
change, or interference. Moreover, particular forces, such as radia-

tion, create predictable responses as they impact with the bonds of
atoms. What makes the atoms respond in precise and measurable
ways?
Consider the ability of an iron-oxide tape to memorize the elec-
tronic pulses made by sounds. Our ability to tape-record a song or
speech onto a magnetizing substance like iron-oxide indicates na-
ture’s memory systems not only exist, but they can be manipulated
to work for us.
When we press a bar magnet upon another magnetic metal we
change the polarity of the molecules making up the metal. The po-
larity has been said to be changed through a restructuring of the
electron orbital orientation, rendering an electron-heavy side and a
proton-heavy side.
This polarization causes an effective memorization of the position-
ing of the magnet. After removing the magnet, some molecules
revert to their original polarity. Others will remain in the same di-
rection. Among the molecules remaining in the changed polarity,
there is a residual memory of the positioning of the field from the
magnet or magnet head.
At the very least, these observations illustrate a deeper mechanism
within the smallest of particles, allowing for a memory system. De-
spite this, accidental-event scientists have persisted. Their assump-
tions that matter is dumb, and its origin is chaotic are clearly refuted
by these studies along with common everyday observations. They
tell us something we intuitively know already: Every atom contains
electromagnetic forces that connect all matter together.
Considering memory at the most minute levels, we can know also
that the largest, most complex structures around us are not moving
randomly. Organized energies on a micro basis will reflect the same
behavior on a macro basis. Unseen organizational forces link struc-
tures and functions together in a constructive, meaningful manner,
from the subatomic particle on up to the largest and most complex
of structures.
183
Memory Requires Designation

If memory is resident even among the smallest of particles and at-
oms, then each atom is uniquely identifiable. Differentiation re-
quires identification: In order to be distinguishable from another, an
object must be identifiable.
In order to be identifiable there must be uniqueness inherent within
each particle and atom, and there must be an energy giving the par-
ticles and atoms the ability to identify each other. In other words,
there must be a coding resident within each atom:
Each human has a distinct fingerprint. Every creature has distinct DNA.
Every snowflake is unique. No two rocks are identically shaped. Every butterfly
has a unique wing print.
These coding systems allow each distinct part and living organism
to be uniquely identifiable. Amongst this uniqueness, we also see
precise structure and repetition of design.
There is replicated order, yet this is harmonized within distinction
and uniqueness. The uniqueness among precisely repeating struc-
tures illustrates that everything has been designated and coded for a
particular reason. Designation illustrates a larger design and intelli-
gent force moving among every part and parcel of the universe.
Designation Requires Assembly
The coding of particles and atoms would also indicate that every
atom is assembled by subatomic particles, and thus each subatomic
particle belongs to that atom. Since each atom is distinguishable, we
must also realize that every molecule is assembled by the distinguish-
able atoms. Therefore, each atom belongs to a particular molecule.
If a smaller part specifically belongs to larger part, then the smaller
part is specified to the larger part. If something is specified to be part
of another part then this creates an overall specification as to the
combination of all the parts.
Furthermore, if there is a specification designating each smaller part
to a particular larger part, then the larger part must be specifically
184
assembled with the smaller parts, according to its specification. Consider

how a part – say a starter motor – to an automobile has a specifica-
tion:
The specification of a starter motor will show a number of smaller parts fit pre-
cisely together to make up the starter motor. Each smaller part belongs in a
certain position and arrangement on the starter motor. Furthermore, each of the
smaller parts will fit in a particular way, requiring that one small part is as-
sembled before another small part can be attached. A cotter pin, for example,
might be put on last, after the various nuts and bolts have been assembled and
tightened. Since the cotter pin prevents the other parts from falling off, it must be
assembled last.
In the same way, if we assume that subatomic parts make up atoms,
and atoms make up molecules, then there is a particular assembly
required. If we further realize that the different atoms are identifi-
able and distinguishable from each other, they have designation.
This means that physical matter is specifically assembled. Furthermore,
we must realize that any specification requires design. The question
then becomes: Where did this assembly and design come from?
Assembly Requires Programming
Living organisms will assemble molecules into complex and precise
structures. Forces outside our perception within living organisms deter-
mine how to convert and combine molecules from one form to
another, utilizing them for cellular parts. An example of this is how
a living organism will ingest and process purines and pyrimidines
together with other nutrients, and with them, assemble specific
complex DNA structures through a complex process called replica-
tion.
This is a form of specification coding: The living organism dupli-
cates tracks of instructional information onto DNA strands, laying
nucleotides together in a helixed ladder of hydrogen and sugar-
phosphate bonds. These coded DNA molecules provide a chemical
specification blueprint for each living cell’s designed functions.
There are trillions of cells in the body and each has a specific func-
tion. Lung cells process oxygen. Muscle cells produce energy and
185
force. Intestinal cells assimilate nutrients. Each cell is organized

precisely to operate within specific tissue systems in a highly com-
plex yet coordinated fashion. Each cell is like a little factory. A cell
has a DNA replication and transcription center, little organelles
which produce energy and other substances like enzymes.
Each cell also has a precisely-structured cell membrane, which al-
lows certain molecules and ions in, and certain molecules and ions
out. Tiny gates called ion channels provide the pathway. Ion channels
also have gates that scan and permit particular molecules in and out,
precisely restricting access to unauthorized molecules.
In much the same way each atom contains precision in specified
assembly, each cell is also designed with an intelligent coding sys-
tem, enabling it to function in a precisely specified and coordinated
fashion.
Groupings of these precisely arranged and organized cells move to
a rhythm of guided macro-organization. Forces outside our perception
organize these groupings into tissue systems, and each cell does its
part to contribute to the tissue system function in a display of utter
coordination. These tissue systems bring together specific functions
into larger, coordinated functions as they intelligently perform op-
erations necessary to keep the entire body healthy and alive.
Without forces outside our perception organizing the assembly of parti-
cles into atoms, atoms into molecules, molecules into cells, cells
into tissue systems, tissue systems into organs and organs into
physical bodies, chaos would be the result. Yet rather than chaos,
we have a beautiful functioning orchestration of design and assem-
bly.
Nature is a Display of Programming
Within all natural structures and functions, precise assembly is ap-
parent. While the growth patterns of leaves and flowers might ap-
pear random at first glance, in reality every leaf of every plant grows
within a precise pattern of assembly, sequence and angle:
186
Flower petals and leaves have precise geometrical relationships as they grow
around branches. Flowers have precise petal ratios when counting around the
stalk: From 13/34 to 34/89, and always in Fibonacci sequence.
The Fibonacci sequence is a series of numbers: 0,1,2,3,5,8,13,
21,34,55…. observed throughout nature. A Fibonacci number is
found by adding the two preceding Fibonacci numbers together, i.e.
1+2=3, 2+3=5, 3+5=8 and so on.
The angles of outward projection of branches and leaves from trees and plant
stalks are always assembled in precise Fibonacci ratios: ½ in grasses, lime and
elm; 1/3 in sedges, beech, hazel and blackberry; 2/5 in roses, oak, cherry,
apple and holly; 3/8 in bananas, poplar, willow and pear; 5/13 in leeks,
almond and pussy willow; and 8/21 in pine cones and cactus.
Attributed to Leonardo Fibonacci around 1200 A.D., who traced a
family tree of rabbits, the Fibonacci sequence can be seen all around
us and throughout nature. It can be seen in plants, fish, insects,
animals, and humans, both from a perspective of dimension and
appendage. Plants are not sprouting leaves and branches randomly.
They are producing these precisely specified arrangements due to
forces outside our perception.
Symmetries in nature’s design surround us. When sequential Fibo-
nacci measurements are arranged into polygons, they form rectan-
gles which, when laid against a square of the next Fibonacci num-
ber, becomes the famous ‘golden rectangle:’
The golden rectangle is made from two adjacent 1x1 squares, which become a
1x2 rectangle. This can be laid against a 2x2 square, becoming a 2x3 rectan-
gle, which if laid against a 3x3 square, becomes a 3x5 rectangle, and so on.
The Fibonacci rectangle is observed throughout nature, including the outside
dimensions and inner segments of the bodies of plants, animals and humans.
This proportion is sometimes referred to as ‘Phi’. Another natural
pattern observed throughout nature is revealed when golden rec-
tangles are assembled around each other into a spiral:
The ‘golden spiral’ is formed concentrically outward by the golden section dimen-
sions of 1:1.618. The golden spiral is seen repeatedly throughout our natural
187
world. It is seen in the nautilus shell. It is seen in storm systems such as hurri-
canes and tornados observed from above. It is seen in the cross-section of an
ocean wave hitting the beach. It is seen in the swirl of water down a drain. It is
seen among the tops of plant florets like cauliflower and broccoli. It is seen in the
cross-graphing of the sine waves within radiation frequencies.
The golden spiral and golden rectangle are thus connected together
throughout nature in three-dimensional precision. They can be seen
linked in sequence, seen from above, appearing through movement
and structure amongst living organisms and natural phenomena.
To an untrained or uneducated eye, nature may appear wild; in real-
ity nature is precisely designed and arranged with sequence and
precision. The whole of nature and all of its parts are working under
a grand scheme, driven by programmed forces outside our perception.
Repeating Functionality Requires Programming
Repeating functions must be arranged. Something that continues to
function repeatedly operates within an arrangement.
For example, we could arrange our furniture, putting each furnish-
ing in place. That would be an arrangement or a design. However,
should we arrange things so that the furniture repeatedly re-arranges
itself when moved, or moves to accommodate guests when they
come in, and then re-arranges itself back to the original arrange-
ment; that type of arrangement goes beyond a one-up (or single-
operation) arrangement.
This type of arrangement has been functionally programmed. Such an
assembled functional arrangement would require not only precise
design, but programmed systems of cause and effect to allow for a
variety of decisions and actions, each linked to eventual results.
In other words, to allow someone the choice of more than one
course of action, the potential results of every possible choice must
be established and coded into the system.
This is what we would call a program. For example, computers func-
tion using programs that allow an array of possible outcomes, with
each action linked to a particular result:
188
If A happens, then X results; if B happens, then Y is the result. If C happens,

then Z is the result.
Now if these were random events, then A would not be linked spe-
cifically with the Y result. In a random event, sometimes A might
result in Z, and sometimes A might result in Y or even X.
There would be no designation between actions and results whatsoever if life were
chaotic.
In our everyday lives, we can personally observe this designated
cause and effect in action. We can see that our activities each have
particular consequences. If we take a certain action, we will have a
particular result or type of result. If we choose another path, we will
have another result altogether. Although we may not always under-
stand why, we usually learn from this cause and effect relationship.
Since we can observe particular results for particular actions, we can
realize that some actions are preferable to others. This also allows
for social order and lessons of morality. If life were chaotic, it
would not matter what actions we took. Any action might result in
any type of result.
Programming Eliminates Chance
Chance has been the object of increasing study by modern scientists
over the past few centuries. Early modern scientists studied the
possibilities and the mathematics of chance using coin-tosses, dice
throws, and card games.
Because the larger tosses did not consistently close the variance
between 50%, most researchers assumed the dice or coins them-
selves had some sort of inborn bias towards landing on one side or
another. Perhaps a slight weight differential on one side or one edge
of that coin existed. Perhaps other gravitational effects or wind
resistance were preventing an unbiased coin toss.
Over the last few decades, these tools have been replaced by com-
puter-controlled devices to more closely study theoretically random
events. Some very interesting observations have resulted from these
experiments.
189
In 1969, a machine called the Random number generator was in-

vented by Dr. Helmut Schmidt, a physicist at Boeing. This device
utilized a mechanical basis to produce a theoretically random flash-
ing of one of four lights. An observer could predict the result by
pressing a button under one of the lights, signaling the light the
observer though would light up next, using the decay emissions
from the strontium-90 isotope to confirm theoretical, natural ran-
domness. With a choice of four selections, the statistical average
over a large number of guesses should be no more than 25%. How-
ever, large trial numbers resulted in levels closer to 27%, indicating
some sort of ability to predict the result (Schmidt 1969, Palmer
1997).
Following these studies, questions arose (Wagenaar 1972) as to
whether the effect was kinetic or precognition. In other words, were
the observers predicting the results or affecting the results? In an
attempt to isolate this, Dr. Schmidt refined the methodology and
instrumentation of the RNG (or REG for random event generator),
which performed randomized calculations resulting in either an
even or an odd result. This machine was set up to duplicate the
theoretically random result of a coin-toss: heads or tails. With this
sort of programming, large volumes of results could be compiled
quickly and accurately.
Over its history of research, coin-tosses traditionally resulted in a
decreasing variance between a 50/50 result when the number of
tosses increased – up to a point. As the tosses get higher, the vari-
ances do not decrease as expected. This notion perplexed research-
ers, because a seemingly accidental series of results should continue
to trend towards the unbiased 50% level as the number of tosses
increased.
Dr. Schmidt’s series of studies with the RNG confirmed this prob-
lem. As the number of results increased, significant variances re-
mained, staying above 1-4% higher than the unbiased 50/50 level.
What could be preventing the expected and gradual descent to
50/50?
190
In the early 1970s Princeton Professor Dr. Robert Jahn refined

random number generator research. Dr. Jahn improved upon the
machine, increased the number of controls in the protocol, and
expanded the range of its study. Like Dr. Schmidt’s, Dr. Jahn’s ma-
chines would randomly produce either a one or a zero in a random
sequence, but with any possible source of bias removed.
As hundreds of these RNG studies were compiled by Dr. Jahn and
others, the same results emerged. RNG variances from 50/50 con-
tinued with larger runs, with substantial differences. After investi-
gating all the potentially related causes, Dr. Jahn began investigating
various unrelated outside events in an attempt to correlate the vari-
ances. The first of Dr. Jahn’s discovered variances related to the
attendants monitoring the RNG run.
Amazingly, variances trended differently for females than for male
observers. Investigating the human even further, his trials began
asking observers to wish for one result or another. These resulted in
larger variances. While some observers tended to ‘wish” the result
towards the wish, results for other observers resulted trends away
from their wishes. In other words, some observers could affect the
RNG results more than other observers could, while still others
might produce still opposite results. Note that these observers were
not physically able to affect the results, and most were not consid-
ered gifted in psi. They were merely observing the results (Jahn and
Dunne 1987; Jahn et al. 1985; Jahn et al. 1987).
Dr. Roger Nelson, an emeritus researcher and professor at Prince-
ton, took over the research from Professor Jahn. Dr. Nelson began
taking the RNG machines to group events and discovered that
group intentions could influence the RNG results in an even greater
way. Everything changed on September 6, 1997.
On this day, billions of people throughout the world watched the
funeral of the once Princess of Wales Diana. On this day, the RNG
machine also made a massive spike, illustrating some kind of rela-
tionship to population consciousness (Radin 1997; Jahn et al. 1997).
191
Shortly after, Dr. Nelson brought together a team of seventy-five

researchers from around the world and connected forty RNGs
through the internet – naming these linked RNG satellites “EGGs.”
The EGGs essentially brought RNG data from all over the world
into a central computer for analysis. At first, the data did not seem
to reveal anything of great significance (Radin 1997; Jahn and
Dunne 1997).
The first events to stimulate the EGGs around the world were the
bombing of American embassies in Nairobi and Tanzania in August
of 1998. After these extraordinary results, the Global Consciousness
Project was in full swing. Dr. Nelson and his associates began watch-
ing other mass events. Events like the Super Bowl, the Olympics,
O.J. Simpson verdict, and the Academy Awards produced spikes in
the RNG graphs.
Major catastrophes such as earthquakes or even major sporting
events would move the RNG results significantly one way or an-
other. In other words, events involving greater levels of conscious-
ness among large populations affect RNG results significantly. It
became clear that globally relevant events are followed by leanings
of mass consciousness, which somehow affect random events
(Radin 1997).
A stirring RNG result took place on September 11, 2001. Of
course, the RNG charts were spiking significantly after the bomb-
ing, associated with the world’s reaction to the bombing and the
death toll count. However, something even more mysterious hap-
pened: The shift in RNG results began four hours before the first plane hit.
While the RNG research initially focused on the ability of humans
to influence events, another relationship began to emerge. A theo-
retically random event – supposedly isolated and thus unattached to
any other event – appears to be connected to various unrelated
events after isolating all known forms of bias.
Since the RNG machine is the ultimate test of isolated, seemingly
random and controlled events, it is the perfect vehicle to test mod-
ern science’s notion of a chaotic universe of randomness. These test
192
results, performed by researchers with integrity and impeccable

credentials, reveals a universe of design and programming: An inten-
tional universe driven by consciousness.
Nature’s Events are Connected
The mass movements of migratory animals illustrate large-scale
organization in nature. The movements and actions of large popula-
tions of animals have long been observed by biologists, yet not
been well understood. It is mysterious that somehow a migratory
bird will return to within meters of where they were originally born,
flying from many thousands of miles away at the same time each
year to that very spot.
From the symmetrical flight of birds in formation, to the migration
of caribou, whales and butterflies, these mass movements show
design and assembly with a precision beyond the scope of these
creatures. Yet we can observe other events connected to these mi-
grations and mass movements.
We can see that migrations are connected to movements of the sun;
magnetic influences; and environmental conditions existing at the
origin and destination of the migrations. In the same way, our
movements are also connected and organized. Just as the migra-
tions of animals are outside of their scope of understanding, our
movements and events are outside of our scope.
We often marvel at how organized and beautiful beehives or ant
farms are. We can easily see that each individual bee or ant is not
aware of this incredible level of organization. Similarly, when we fly
over our cities we can see the same sort of master organization.
Like the bees or ants, we did not have a conscious awareness of
how the city might look from above as it sprawled over the centu-
ries.
Curiously, cities look a lot like our computer chips: our highways
look very much like a computer data bus, and our factories and
warehouses look amazingly similar to our computer capacitors and
memory chips. These illustrations of organization beyond an organ-
193
isms’ conscious planning also reveal forces outside our perception work-
ing within a grand scheme.
Connected Events are Interwoven
All events are interwoven in a grand scheme outside of our com-
prehension. Events we observe on a daily basis may appear to be
random, but each event has a way of affecting something else, creat-
ing a new possible event or circumstance. When we apply this to
events taking place in our lives, we can easily connect action events
to resulting events. This connectedness allows us to choose actions
that create positive results, and avoid actions that create negative
ones. When these lessons of action/results are added up, they be-
come morals.
Science fiction writers and movie producers like the theme of con-
nected events, as they reflect the reality of our personal existence.
Movies and books typically connect events in fictional lives to par-
ticular outcome themes. These create what we call “the moral of the
story.” Producers and writers will also sometimes play with the slip-
stream of time in their stories, creating “time capsules.”
These time capsules move the characters back or forward in time,
exploring connected events and their relationship with time. Such a
time capsule story might put the actors back a few hundred years,
enabling them to change an event that took place in the past. These
story scripts portray even an insignificant change in a past event as
creating numerous dramatic changes in present and future condi-
tions.
These time capsule stories may be fictional, but they are based upon
widely accepted observations portraying a grand scheme of con-
nectedness among seemingly unrelated events. Some have termed
this scenario the ‘butterfly effect.’
If two events are related, it means they are connected in some way.
If connected events are related, there is no isolation between them.
Related means there is a relationship between the events. A relation-
ship means that there is a bond between the events. We can often
194
see these bonds simply because the two events are bound by the
participants or the subjects of the events.
For example, we know that if we chopped down a tree, the tree
could fall on something and possibly damage it. The bond between
the tree being chopped and the tree damaging something was the
tree itself and the tree chopper. The two events would be connected
by at least two common participants.
There is not always an obvious common participant seen between
related events. This does not mean a bond doesn’t exist, however.
In the RNG research, there is no obvious bond between the event
and the RNG results, yet there is a definite relationship, illustrated
by their mutual occurrence outside of coincidence. They may seem
outwardly disconnected yet they are invisibly bound by forces outside
our perception.
Often in our own lives, we will see seemingly disconnected events
unfolding to reveal a moral:
A man walks down the street and stops to help up an elderly woman who has
fallen. He carefully props her up, making sure she is steadied onto her cane.
Later that day the man trips going down some stairs and just as he was about
to tumble down the stairs to his injury, someone catches him, preventing his fall.
In thinking how lucky he was, the man remembers how he helped the elderly
person earlier in the day.
We might immediately relate to such a relationship between our
own actions and events. For those who are doubtful, regardless of
whether we can physically relate these two occurrences, the events
are absolutely related by the fact that the man remembered his good
deed after someone did one for him.
That remembrance in itself connects the events, and hence creates
the moral. We experience so many of these occurrences throughout
our lives. While some of us may dismiss them as mere coincidence,
others will connect them. Yet even the thought that they were coin-
cidental connects them and makes us entertain life’s connectedness.
195
We can also see how every event is linked somehow to at least one
other event. We can see that every event has at least one prior event,
which caused or influenced its result. Since we can say that every
event is connected to other events somehow, this would create a
lattice of interconnected events. This lattice of events makes up an
entire array of events, of which every event is connected to a few
others. This means that all events are interconnected by a master
design of connectivity:
Every piece of wood in a house is connected to at least one or two other pieces.
No wood is floating around without being connected. Even though one piece of
wood is only connected to only a few other pieces, because all pieces of wood to-
gether make up the entire house, each piece is connected to every other piece by
the master design and purpose of the house as a structure.
All events are connected because there are forces outside our perception
running through every event, just as there are forces outside our percep-
tion running through each atom and through each cell of the body.
Random Events do not Exist
These facts together with the RNG research illustrates that while
events may trend toward a natural result; any particular event is
driven by unseen influences and connected to other events. Event
outcomes may be affected by observers, other events, or both.
Even seemingly unrelated events taking place thousands of miles
away may be affecting events unfolding before us.
This means that seemingly random events are not random after all.
Seemingly unconnected events are actually connected. No matter
how hard we try to produce random events, all occurrences are, at
the end of the day, connected to other occurrences somehow.
Therefore, no occurrence can be absolutely random.
Organization Requires Outside Influence
A designed system reveals outside influence. If we accept that to-
day’s universe has the complexity of cause and effect, then we
would have to accept that this complexity was programmed prior to
the actual connection of events. If the programming preceded the
196
connection of events, the source of the design – the designer –

would also have to precede the events. If programmed events were
preceded by a designer-programmer, the designer-programmer
must exist outside of the field of events.
According to the Law of Energy Conservation, the only way to change
the total energy of any system is through an intervention from an
outside force. Since assembly requires energy and programming, an
outside designer-programmer exerting force from the outside is
necessary. Such a designer-programmer must exist prior to design
and assembly of the program. Furthermore, it is logical that in order
to adjust such a programmed system, the designer-programmer
must be able to intervene with enough energy to make necessary
adjustments.
Events are connected because they were arranged and designed for
a particular purpose. Programmed assembly requires planning. The
initial impetus for such planning requires purpose and intention.
Planning, design, and programmed assembly would not logically be
initiated without a purpose. Coding events to affect and connect to
other events indicates a grand scheme created for a particular pur-
pose. If not, what would be the use of such a tremendous coding
effort? What would be the logic of programmed events without a
reason? Any movie with a plot and moral comes with a purpose –
why expend any effort otherwise?
The Soup of the Primordials
The modern primordial soup theory goes something like this: At
some point in time, billions of years ago, there existed a random
pool of lifeless chemicals. The pool was accidentally struck by light-
ning or some other form of tremendous heat. Out of this accidental
impact, various proteins were created, and DNA somehow evolved,
which supposedly led to the first living single-celled creature. The
environment needed for such an event has been debated over the
years by modern scientists. Some propose that an environment like
the current one existed, while others claim the earth was frozen
back then. Still others have argued that a hot, molten environment
had to exist to allow for such a fantastic accident.
197
In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries accidental soupists

postulated that not only could life have evolved from a chemical
soup, but that spontaneous life could form at any time from any
number of possible soups. At the time, microscopes were undergo-
ing vast improvement and bacteria were just starting to be noticed.
Eventually Louis Pasteur, known for developing pasteurizing tech-
niques to inoculate bacteria, proved to the scientific community that
life could not spontaneously arise from even the richest of initially
sterile soups. He showed that sterile soups would only lose their
sterility if bacteria or fungi came in from the outside.
The soupists did not give up easily, however. The soup theory was
updated with each passing observation and theory through the
twentieth century. Today the modern version is based on a supposi-
tion that a random combination of molecules such as methane,
ammonia, water and hydrogen sulfide supposedly accidentally came
together to form simple peptides and nucleotides. These supposedly
formed complex DNA structures and proteins that would eventu-
ally (and spontaneously) come alive. This spontaneous-DNA theory
has come to be the linchpin in this soupy theory.
DNA and Protein are not Spontaneous
Scientists believe that protein is the building block of life and DNA
is the instructional facility determining the function of a living sys-
tem. Proteins are made up of a mixture of 20 different amino acids,
into complex molecules consisting of hundreds of combined amino
acids. The protein molecule is often a twisted, semi-helix molecule
with extremely complex properties and activities. Some proteins act
as enzymes; some act as hormones; and others perform various
other activities inside the body. The chemical make up of just one
protein molecule is extremely complex. It has been noted by a Dr.
Francis Crick that just a small protein of some 200 amino acids has
a one in 10260 chance of being produced by accident. And this is just
one simple protein molecule. The typical organism makes billions of
different protein molecules each and every day.
Meanwhile, double-helix deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA, is also a
very complex molecule. It is elegantly designed, yet complexly
198
coded. A DNA molecule is made up of long sugar-phosphate

chains linked to combinations of four possible purine or pyrimidine
nucleotides. As a result, DNA molecules have tremendous helix-
spiral shapes. The specific ordering and combination of the nucleo-
tides on the DNA chain makes up a particular code, often called the
‘genetic code’ by scientists. It has been estimated that one human
DNA molecule will have over 3 billion base (purine or pyrimidine)
combination pairs: Not an easy molecule to come together by acci-
dent.
Researchers have observed that living organisms will assemble spe-
cial RNA molecules, which will make copies of the DNA’s coding
and relay (or replicate) that coding to make new DNA. To accom-
plish this, an RNA strand will wrap against the DNA strand and
extract the code to form a copy. Once it has a copy, it can either
help make another DNA, or transfer the coding on to structures
that manufacture proteins.
Scientists believe that there are three basic types of RNA: messen-
ger-RNA, transfer-RNA, and ribosomal-RNA. Although they have
found several other types of RNA, these three types are basic to
passing along the instructional messages of DNA coding. At least
that is what has been theorized by modern scientists. But we ask:
How would an arrangement of “chaotic” chemicals somehow have
the ability to instruct an entire organism’s chemicals and tissues how
to function?
Regardless of this lack of logic, scientists assume that this chemical
arrangement of DNA provide the instructions for the arrangement
and function of a living physical body and all its tissue systems.
Somehow, accidental-event scientists postulate, simple chemicals
accidentally came together to form these utterly complex coded
helix structures of instructional DNA and RNA. Then somehow
these lifeless magical chemical combinations spontaneously became
living single-cell creatures, complete with the need to survive.
Because DNA cannot replicate (or reproduce) its coding without
RNA, some accidental-event scientists have proposed that RNA
somehow accidentally formed first, and from the RNA, DNA was
199
created. The problem with this theory is that RNA cannot replicate
anything without any DNA to replicate. If RNA was first, what
could it have replicated, and what would it have replicated from? Of
course, DNA cannot be formed without RNA, because RNA as-
sembles the nucleotides to make the DNA. So we have the classic
catch-22: DNA requires RNA to be produced, and RNA cannot
replicate anything without any DNA coding to replicate. This
means that neither could have come first.
Is it even logical to assume that accidental events resulted in the
incredible complexities of DNA and RNA? From a purely chemical
and biological standpoint, it has not been possible to duplicate
DNA creation from basic chemicals in any lab. A few real basic
polypeptides have been formed in labs, but these were hardly acci-
dental events. No complex DNA and RNA structures complete
with protein-mapping, replication and translation abilities have been
synthesized from dormant chemicals, even intentionally. Dr. Crick’s
analysis of this potential is parlayed analogously:
An accidental formation of DNA from a batch of chemicals might be compared
to dropping 1000 typewriters and 1000 illiterate monkeys out of an airplane
and expecting the books of the Library of Congress to be typed up and ready for
printing when they all hit the ground.
DNA has not been synthesized because DNA is manufactured only
by living organisms, and its coding has been engineered through
forces outside our perception. Chemical combinations can certainly be
arranged by putting certain elements together with heat and mixing.
When combined with heat, most elements will become volatile and
can form bonds with other elemental ions. Without an organizing
principle, these bonds will typically be very basic. Replicating dou-
ble-helix DNA is another animal altogether.
DNA Comes from Life
Neither DNA nor RNA is functional outside of a living organism.
As soon as either is disconnected from a living organism, they be-
come lifeless chemicals, subject to immediate decomposition. When
an organism eats, the DNA in its meal will first be digested and
200
broken down into basic components before the organism can as-
semble its own signature DNA molecules with it. If DNA were
alive, it would be able to function outside of the living organism, and
act independently inside of any organism that ate it. Instead, when
DNA is eaten, the organism will simply break it down into basic
components just as fats and sugars get broken down during diges-
tion. Furthermore, the living organism is not dependent upon any
particular DNA or RNA molecule. If a chunk of DNA is extracted
from a person’s body for a DNA test for example, this is no loss to
the body. The living organism will simply manufacture more of it.
If a living organism manufactures DNA by assembling nucleic acids
from raw nutrients, how could a living organism be created by
DNA? If only living systems manufacture DNA, then life would
have to precede DNA manufacture. While DNA may be resident
inside a living cell, it is hardly the cause of the life of that cell. This
is illustrated when the cell dies: The DNA will still be resident in the
dead cell. If an organism dies (i.e., the conscious being leaves), all
the DNA will be retained by the dead body of the organism. Before
decomposition breaks apart the dead body’s DNA and various pro-
teins, intact DNA will lie lifeless with the rest of the body parts.
Pumping in new DNA will not bring the dead body back to life. If
DNA were the cause of life in a living organism, why would it still
be there after death? And why couldn’t fresh DNA bring a dead
body back to life?
Quite simply, the living organism produces DNA because DNA is a
product of life. DNA is assembled by living systems to reflect a larger
blueprint for future growth and activities throughout molecular
change. Life is not a product of DNA. Yes, DNA coding is passed
down to new physical generations by parent organisms that blend
their DNA coding when mating. The conscious being is drawn into
the sperm prior to fertilization, and from there the genes adjust to
perfectly reflect the ongoing consciousness of the inner self. The
initial gene combination is thus a reflection of the consciousness of
the self, who existed before the egg was fertilized.
201
We can easily become confused by gene transplanting in laborato-

ries. Should DNA be extracted from a living cell and inserted into a
donor cell, the donor cell’s genetics may become altered. Inserting
genes into a living body will typically require a virus in order to cre-
ate any significant mutation however. A virus has the ability of in-
fecting multiple cells, forcing its genetic makeup onto these cells,
potentially causing mutation (note that while bacteria are alive, vi-
ruses are not). Without such a genetic carrier, a hapless gene or two
will rarely have any affect upon a living organism.
Genetics Illustrate Deeper Mechanisms
In a multi-cellular organism, scientists have observed that each cell
has a copy of the genetic code of the entire organism. The ramifica-
tions of this are beyond our speculative mental abilities. Through
assembly and design, each cell contains the body’s entire coding, yet
each cell has only a small part of that coding to accomplish.
What mechanism gives each cell the DNA master code yet instructs
each cell to use a specific part of that DNA? Modern science can-
not fathom such an amazing feat of symmetrical holography. Holo-
graphy occurs when each part of a structure reflects the whole
structure while the whole structure supports each part. Each cell of
the trillions of cells within the body reflects the entire organism; yet
each cell functions in its own independent way to contribute to the
functions of the whole organism. Each cell has a different yet
aligned purpose. This level of sophistication, coordination, and re-
flection could only take place through forces beyond our compre-
hension: they could only take place through forces outside our perception.
Unpeeling the Source
Classical physics proposes the ‘First Law of Motion,’ which states that
every body will continue in a state of rest or uniform velocity unless
compelled to change by an external force. Translated into chemis-
try, progressive formations of chemical bonds must be organized by
an outside force. Otherwise their bonds could not continue to pro-
gress. Protein molecules and coded DNA structures are highly pro-
gressive formations, illustrating an external organizational force.
202
Noting that DNA and protein are manufactured and assembled

only in living organisms, the only logical view of their existence is
that they were ultimately designed and coded by an external living
Source.
When we consider the complexity of these various chemical struc-
tures and their formation only in living organisms, the only logical
conclusion is that life is their basis for assembly and function. Fur-
thermore, since the chemicals themselves are not alive, we should
understand the Source for the assembly is alive. We have seen that
living organisms will draw lifeless nutrients into its system to reas-
semble them into complex structures that support a continuance of
life. What gives the living organism this capability? Since we know
these processes only take place when the organism is living, and
cease only when the life is gone from the organism, we should un-
derstand that the life of the organism is the source of those capabili-
ties. Since that life can leave the chemistry of the body at death, we
should also understand that life has its source outside of the physical
dimension.
Every Program Requires a Programmer
Within each living organism, we find a unique conscious being. The
physical body is a structure of complexity and amazing design,
driven by this conscious being. The conscious being is injected into
the sperm prior to fertilization. Without this injection, the seed does
not grow. Likewise, if the conscious being leaves the fertilized seed,
the seed will die. No scientist has been able to physically perceive
this conscious being. This is because the conscious being is tran-
scendental to the physical body and the senses of the physical body.
It is of another nature. Since it is of another nature, our origin must be
from another nature: life.
Life is not produced by matter. Rather than life being a product of
chemistry, life moves from outside chemistry through chemistry. Life
is pulsing through matter, yet is distinct from matter. The physical
world is injected with life in the same way that a sperm is injected
with the conscious being.
203
Living forces outside our perception move through the universe. These
forces assemble and structure matter with precise design and pro-
gramming; measurable and predictable functionality; sequential and
symmetrical arrangement; memory and coded designation; specifi-
cation; interconnected events and activities; mathematical precision;
and event morality indicating intent and purpose. All of these char-
acteristics are synchronized and meaningful because they are living,
conscious forces. These intelligent forces running through matter are
conscious because they extend from a Conscious Supreme Being –
the Ultimate Progenitor.
The two basic components of creation – matter and life – both
originate not by accident, but through intentional design by a Tran-
scendental Intelligent Being. We say “transcendental” because He –
like all of us – is from a realm outside of the physical dimension.
This transcendental realm could also be considered the permanent
dimension because it is the dimension of life. This Intelligent Being from
the permanent dimension of life has assembled nature as a tempo-
rary realm, and pulsed through every atom and organism His own
conscious living energies. Furthermore, He impregnated it with
permanent conscious beings. He thus has intentionally charged the
physical world with design and conscious beings.
Personality Originates with a Person
Some like to speculate that the Supreme Being is somehow imper-
sonally spread throughout the universe like a cloud or gas. Some
vaguely describe Him as the Force, implying only impersonal charac-
teristics. This would not be logical because function, design, and
assembly can arise only from purpose and intention. Purpose and
intention require individual personality, because individual personal-
ity renders specific wishes and desires. A gas, cloud, or vague force
is diametrically opposed to individuality, purpose, and intention.
Furthermore, unique personality is evident among each of us. The
creation of unique personalities must logically arise from a personal-
ity. From a void comes a void and from a purposeful individual
personality comes unique individual personalities with intention and
purpose.
204
Scientifically, we can know that the Supreme Being is a distinct,

Intelligent Personality. His energies may be all-pervading and ex-
pansive, but He is ultimately a Unique Individual. The laws of na-
ture and physics could only be satisfied with this realization.
Albert Einstein, the most celebrated scientist in modern history,
confirmed this when he said in his elderly years, after all his scien-
tific research and Nobel prize-winning theories of space and time
were completed:
“I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that
phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His
thoughts. The rest are details.” -Albert Einstein.
205
Chapter Six
The Purpose of Evolution

This will be a short chapter. The mechanics of evolution of the self may
be complex. But the purpose for it is very simple.
As we illustrated in the previous chapter, the science points to the
reality that each of us was created by a Supreme Being. The natural
question is why?
Now just consider if you were all-powerful, and could create any-
thing. What would you create? This is like the question of what we
would want if we were stranded on a desert island. This has been a
problem probed and answered by many. Most come to the same
conclusion: First and foremost, we would most certainly want a
person on the island to share life with.
This is because by nature we all want to share a relationship with
someone. We are by nature, relationship-loving creatures. We can see
this from the smallest organisms to the largest most advanced or-
ganisms. We know that even bacteria colonize and begin to com-
municate amongst each other within a system called quorum sensing.
Every other creature also groups together in families or colonies,
not only to procreate and protect each other, but also to share their
experiences and communicate. Humans and more evolved animals
such as elephants illustrate even more complex relationships, along
with lifelong bonding and empathy.
The only scientific conclusion is that the source of our existence
must also be relationship-loving. After all, what is created must have a
source, and since we each have an innate desire for relationships,
our Creator must also maintain that same propensity.
Thus there is only one logical solution – which happens to be con-
firmed in scripture – to the problem of why we were created: To
love, serve and exchange a loving relationship with the Supreme
Being. We were created as care-givers to the Supreme Being.
This answers many of the perplexing problems of our existence. It
provides clarity to the reason why each of us seeks the perfect mate
– our soul mate - throughout our lives. Even if we have satisfied the
207
physical need to procreate, we still look for that perfect person to

put our love upon: A person we can care for and devote ourselves
to. And while we may eventually settle down with someone, they
never satisfy our urge for the perfect mate.
This is because God created us to share a relationship of loving
service with Him. In other words, God is that Perfect Person we
are always seeking.
God’s greatest enjoyment – as is ours – is the exchange of a pure
loving relationship.
But real love requires freedom. If God created us so we had no
choice, it would not serve any satisfaction of exchanging love. Love
requires freedom. We must have the freedom to love God or not.
So God created each of us with the freedom to love Him or not.
Now as for those who choose to love God: They reside with God
in His world – a world transcendental to the physical world that
some have referred to as Heaven or the Spiritual World.
As for us conscious beings who rejected our loving relationship
with God: God created a virtual world where we could inherit tem-
porary gross physical bodies that give us the illusion of independ-
ence from Him. These bodies allow us not to see God.
This is because we rejected our loving relationship with Him. We
wanted to be away from God, and try to enjoy ourselves. Instead of
rendering loving service to God, we wanted others to serve us.
So He gave us this virtual world that allows us to feel we are away
from Him, and pretend that we are the center of attention.
Now we live in our self-centered world, each seeking satisfaction on
the backs of others. But we still need love, and that’s why we con-
tinue to search for true love. And that’s why when we find a mate
and have a family, we gain a small sense of satisfaction by rendering
loving service to them: Because loving service is the only thing that
will completely fulfill us.
208
Yet our husband or wife will eventually die (if we don’t divorce
first) and our children will grow up and leave the house. These rela-
tionships are all temporary. The loving service relationship we are
looking for is with our permanent Mate: The Supreme Being.
So now here we are, lost in our false identification with these tem-
porary physical bodies. How do we get out? How do we climb out
of this cycle of birth and death, from one body to the next?
We get out by re-establishing our loving service relationship with
the Supreme Being. This is our only viable path out, because the
stuff of the spiritual realm is caring for and serving the Supreme
Being. Thus we can only get out of the cycle of birth and death by
re-establishing this relationship.
How do we regain our relationship with the Supreme Being?
This is precisely why God programmed the physical world and our
DNA to lead us through a gradual learning process, through differ-
ent bodies and different species. The goal is to rehabilitate us. It is
quite difficult to immediately go from a self-centered consciousness
to a consciousness of humble loving service to God. We must un-
dergo a gradual process of change.
A gradual process of change assures us and God that we are serious
about returning to Him. God wants us back, but He also wants us
to be sure we are committed to returning to Him. He doesn’t want
us to return on a whim.
Just consider a situation where a guy has left his girlfriend after a
long relationship. This will undoubtedly hurt the girl. Then let’s say
the guy knocks on her door a year later and suddenly wants to re-
turn to their relationship.
What does she do? Most women would not take the guy back right
away. They’d want to go a little slowly, and make sure the guy is
serious about returning to the relationship. She doesn’t want him to
whimsically come and go. It is too hurtful. We are talking about the
heart here, not ping-pong. So she demands that they see each other
for a while before getting back together.
209
Now during that time, she is likely to test him. She is likely to test
how serious he is. At the very least, she will carefully watch his ac-
tions to see how committed he is. She also simply wants time for
them to become re-acquainted.
Loving relationships are stuff of the heart. While we tend to think
of God as this gigantic force or larger-than-life person, God is a
Person, and He also has a heart. He is a loving, tender and beautiful
Person. He is funny, engaging, awesome, honest, giving, compas-
sionate, caring, and dependable. God is ever young and ever beauti-
ful. He fulfills each of us with a unique relationship. He is every
thing we’ve ever wanted in a Person.
We just need to turn to Him. We just need to hear Him calling us
back to Him. All of nature, and all of the lessons within the physical
world contain His calling us back to Him. We just need to hear this
and respond.
We need to leave this continuous cycle of birth and death and re-
turn to our loving service relationship with our Best Friend, the
Supreme Person.
210
References and Bibliography
Ackerman D. A Natural History of the Senses. New York: Vintage, 1991.
Aissa J, Harran H, Rabeau M, Boucherie S, Brouilhet H, Benveniste J.
Tissue levels of histamine, PAF-acether and lysopaf-acether in
carrageenan-induced granuloma in rats. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 1996
Jun;110(2):
182-6.
Aïssa J, Jurgens P, Litime M, Béhar I, Benveniste J. Electronic
transmission of the cholinergic signal. FASEB Jnl. 1995;9: A683.
Aïssa J, Litime M, Attias E, Allal A, Benveniste J. Transfer of molecular
signals via electronic circuitry. FASEB Jnl. 1993;7: A602.
Aïssa J, Litime M, Attias E, Benveniste J. Molecular signaling at high
dilution or by means of electronic circuitry. Jnl Immun. 1993;150: 146A.
Aïssa J, Nathan N, Arnoux B, Benveniste J. Biochemical and cellular
effects of heparin-protamine injection in rabbits are partially inhibited by a
PAF-acether receptor antagonist. Eur J Pharmacol. 1996 Apr 29;302(1-
3):123-8.
Appleman P ed. Darwin: A Norton Critical Edition. New York: Norton,
1970.
Asch, S.E. Effects of Group Pressure upon the Modification and
Distortion of Judgment. In Guetzkow J, ed., Groups, Leadership and Men.
Pittsburgh: Carnegie, 1951. Petiot JF, Sainte-Laudy J, Benveniste J.
Interpretation of results on a human basophil degranulation test. Ann Biol
Clin (Paris). 1981;39(6):355-9.
Avanzini G, Lopez L, Koelsch S, Majno M. The Neurosciences and Music
II: From Perception to Performance. Annals of the New York Academy of
Sciences. 2006 Mar;1060.
Bache C. Lifecycles: Reincarnation and the Web of Life. New York:
Paragon House, 1994.
211
Bannerjee H. Americans Who Have Been Reincarnated. New York: Macmillan,

1980.
Baranauskas G, Nistri A. Sensitization of pain pathways in the spinal cord:
cellular mechanisms. Prog Neurobiol. 1998 Feb;54(3):349-65.
Barker A. Scientific Method in Ptolemy's Harmonics. Cambridge: Cambridge
Univ Press, 2000.
Bastide M, Daurat V, Doucet-Jaboeuf M, Pélegrin A, Dorfman P.
Immunomodulator activity of very low doses of thymulin in mice, Int J
Immunotherapy. 1987;3:191-200.
Bastide M, Doucet-Jaboeuf M, Daurat V. Activity and
chronopharmacology of very low doses of physiological immune inducers.
Immun Today. 1985;6: 234-235.
Bastide M. Immunological examples on ultra high dilution research. In:
Endler P, Schulte J (eds.): Ultra High Dilution. Physiology and Physics.
Dordrech: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994:27-34.
Beauvais F, Bidet B, Descours B, Hieblot C, Burtin C, Benveniste J.
Regulation of human basophil activation. I. Dissociation of cationic dye
binding from histamine release in activated human basophils. J Allergy Clin
Immunol. 1991 May;87(5):1020-8.
Beauvais F, Burtin C, Benveniste J. Voltage-dependent ion channels on
human basophils: do they exist? Immunol Lett. 1995 May;46(1-2):81-3.
Beauvais F, Echasserieau K, Burtin C, Benveniste J. Regulation of human
basophil activation; the role of Na+ and Ca2+ in IL-3-induced
potentiation of IgE-mediated histamine release from human basophils.
Clin Exp Immunol. 1994 Jan;95(1):191-4.
Beauvais F, Shimahara T, Inoue I, Hieblot C, Burtin C, Benveniste J.
Regulation of human basophil activation. II. Histamine release is
potentiated by K+ efflux and inhibited by Na+ influx. J Immunol. 1992 Jan
1;148(1):149-54.
Becker R. The Body Electric. New York: Morrow, 1985.
212
Belyaev D. K., A. O. Ruvinsky and L. N. Trut. Inherited activation-

inactivation of the star gene in foxes. Jnl Heredity. 1981; 72:264–274.
Belyaev DK, Trut LN. Accelerating evolution. Sci USSR. 1982; 5:24–29,
60–64.
Belyaev DK. Destabilizing selection as a factor in domestication. Jnl
Heredity. 1979; 70:301–308.
Belyaev, D K. Domestication of animals. Sci Jnl 1969; 5:47–52.
Bensky D, Gable A, Kaptchuk T (transl.). Chinese Herbal Medicine Materia
Medica. Seattle: Eastland Press, 1986.
Benveniste J, Aïssa J, Guillonnet D. A simple and fast method for in vivo
demonstration of electromagnetic molecular signaling (EMS) via high
dilution or computer recording. FASEB Jnl. 1999;13: A163.
Benveniste J, Aïssa J, Guillonnet D. Digital biology : Specificity of the
digitized molecular signal. FASEB Jnl. 1998;12: A412.
Benveniste J, Aïssa J, Guillonnet D. The molecular signal is not functional
in the absence of "informed" water. FASEB Jnl. 1999;13: A163.
Benveniste J, Aissa J, Litime MH, Tsaegaca GT, Thomas Y. Transfer of
the molecular signal by electronic amplification. FASEB J. 1994;8:A398.
Benveniste J, Arnoux B, Hadji L. Highly dilute antigen increases coronary
flow of isolated heart from immunized guinea-pigs. FASEB Jnl. 1992;6:
A1610.
Benveniste J, Davenas E, Ducot B, Cornillet B, Poitevin B, Spira A.
L'agitation de solutions hautement diluées n'induit pas d'activité
biologique spécifique. Comptes-Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences de Paris.
1991;312 :461-466.
Benveniste J, Davenas E, Ducot B, Spira A. Basophil achromasia by dilute
ligand: a reappraisal. FASEB Jnl. 1991;5: A1008.
Benveniste J, Ducot B, Spira A. Memory of water revisited. Nature. 1994
213
Aug 4;370(6488):322.
Benveniste J, Guillonnet D. QED and digital biology. Riv Biol. 2004 Jan-
Apr;97(1):169-72.
Benveniste J, Jurgens P, Aïssa J. Digital recording/transmission of the
cholinergic signal. FASEB Jnl. 1996;10: A1479.
Benveniste J, Jurgens P, Hsueh W, Aïssa J. Transatlantic transfer of
digitized antigen signal by telephone link. Jnl Aller Clin Immun. 1997;99:
S175.
Benveniste J, Kahhak L, Guillonnet D. Specific remote detection of
bacteria using an electromagnetic / digital procedure. FASEB Jnl.
1999;13: A852.
Benveniste J. Benveniste on Nature investigation. Science. 1988 Aug
26;241(4869):1028.
Benveniste J. Benveniste on the Benveniste affair. Nature. 1988 Oct
27;335(6193):759.
Benveniste J. Diagnosis of allergic diseases by basophil count and in vitro
degranulation using manual and automated tests. Nouv Presse Med. 1981
Jan 24;10(3):165-9.
Benveniste J. Meta-analysis of homoeopathy trials. Lancet. 1998 Jan 31;351
(9099):367.
Berk M, Dodd S, Henry M. Do ambient electromagnetic fields affect
behaviour? A demonstration of the relationship between geomagnetic
storm activity and suicide. Bioelectromagnetics. 2006 Feb;27(2):151-5.
Bitbol M, Luisi PL. Autopoiesis with or without cognition: defining life at
its edge. J R Soc Interface. 2004 Nov 22;1(1):99-107.
Bjerregaard C. Plato and the Greeks on Music as an Element in
Education. The Word. 1913 Feb.
Blackmore SJ. Near-death experiences. J R Soc Med. 1996 Feb;89(2):73-6.
214
Bourgine P, Stewart J. Autopoiesis and cognition. Artif Life. 2004

Summer;10(3):327-45.
Bowler PJ. The Eclipse of Darwinism: Antievolutionary Theories in the
Decades Around 1900. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1983.
Braunstein G, Labat C, Brunelleschi S, Benveniste J, Marsac J, Brink C.
Evidence that the histamine sensitivity and responsiveness of guinea-pig
isolated trachea are modulated by epithelial prostaglandin E2 production.
Br J Pharmacol. 1988 Sep;95(1):300-8.
Burr H, Smith G, Strong L. Bio-electric Properties of Cancer-Resistant
and Cancer-Susceptible Mice. American Journal of Cancer. 1938;32:240-248
Burr H. The Fields of Life. New York: Ballantine, 1972.
Calvin W. The Handbook of Brain Theory and Neural Networks. Boston:
MIT Press, 1995.
Churchill G, Doerge R. Empirical threshold values for quantitative trait
mapping. Genetics 1994;138:963-971.
Chwirot WB, Popp F. White-light-induced luminescence and mitotic
activity of yeast cells. Folia Histochemica et Cytobiologica. 1991;29(4):155.
Citro M, Endler PC, Pongratz W, Vinattieri C, Smith CW, Schulte J.
Hormone effects by electronic transmission. FASEB J. 1995:Abstract
12161.
Citro M, Smith CW, Scott-Morley A, Pongratz W, Endler PC. Transfer of
information from molecules by means of electronic amplification, in P.C.
Endler, J. Schulte (eds.): Ultra High Dilution. Physiology and Physics.
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 1994;209-214.
Cohen S, Popp F. Biophoton emission of the human body. J Photochem &
Photobio. 1997;B 40:187-189.
Cohen S, Popp F. Low-level luminescence of the human skin. Skin Res
Tech. 1997;3:177-180.
215
Crick F. Life Itself: Its Origin and Nature. New York: Simon and Schuster,
1981.
Cristina Cavallini M, Cellini E, Di Bella D, Erzegovesi S, Foulon C,
Gabrovsek M, Gorwood P, Hebebrand J, Hinney A, Holliday J, Hu X,
Karwautz A, Kipman A, Komel R, Nacmias B, Remschmidt H, Ricca V,
Sorbi S, Tomori M, Wagner G, Treasure J, Collier DA, Estivill X.
Association of BDNF with restricting anorexia nervosa and minimum
body mass index: a family-based association study of eight European
populations. Eur J Hum Genet. 2005 Apr;13(4):428-34.
Davenas E, Beauvais F, Amara J, Oberbaum M, Robinzon B, Miadonna
B, Tedeschi A, Pomeranz B, Fortner P, Belon P, Sainte-Laudy J, Poitevin
B, Benveniste J. Human basophil degranulation triggered by very dilute
antiserum against IgE. Nature. 1988;333: 816-818.
Davenas E, Poitevin B, Benveniste J. Effect on mouse peritoneal
macrophages of orally administered very high dilutions of silica. European
Journal of Pharmacology. 1987;135: 313-319.
Davis GE Jr, Lowell WE. Chaotic solar cycles modulate the incidence and
severity of mental illness. Med Hypotheses. 2004;62(2):207-14.
Davis GE Jr, Lowell WE. Solar cycles and their relationship to human
disease and adaptability. Med Hypotheses. 2006;67(3):447-61.
Davis GE Jr, Lowell WE. The Sun determines human longevity:
teratogenic effects of chaotic solar radiation. Med Hypotheses.
2004;63(4):574-81.
Dawkins R. Climbing Mount Improbable. New York: Viking Press, 1996.
Dawkins R. The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1977 (1989 edition).
Dennett D. Brainstorms: Philosophical Essays on Mind & Psychology.
Cambridge: MIT Press., 1980.
Dennett,D. Consciousness Explained. London: Little, Brown and Co., 1991.
Depue BE, Banich MT, Curran T. Suppression of emotional and
216
nonemotional content in memory: effects of repetition on cognitive

control. Psychol Sci. 2006 May;17(5):441-7.
Dere E, Kart-Teke E, Huston JP, De Souza Silva MA. The case for
episodic memory in animals. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2006;30(8):1206-24.
Dunne B, Jahn R, Nelson R. Precognitive Remote Perception. Princeton
Engineering Anomalies Research Laboratory Report. Princeton. 1983 Aug.
Egon G, Chartier-Kastler E, Denys P, Ruffion A. Spinal cord injury
patient and Brindley neurostimulation. Prog Urol. 2007 May;17(3):535-9.
Einstein In Need Of Update? Calculations Show The Speed Of Light
Might Change. Science Daily. 2001 Feb 12.
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/ 2001/02/010212075309.htm. Acc. 2007
Oct.
Electronic Evidence of Auras, Chakras in UCLA Study. Brain/Mind
Bulletin. 1978;3:9 Mar 20.
Endler P, Pongratz W, van Wijk R, Waltl K, Hilgers H, Brandmaier R.
Transmission of hormone information by non-molecular means. FASEB
Jnl. 1994;8: A400.
Endler PC, Pongratz W, Kastberger G, Wiegant F, Schulte J. The effect
of highly diluted agitated thyroxine on the climbing activity of frogs, J Vet
Hum Tox. 1994;36:56-59.
Endler PC, Pongratz W, Smith CW, Schulte J. Non-molecular
information transfer from thyroxine to frogs with regard to
'homoeopathic' toxicology, J Vet Hum Tox. 1995:37:259-260.
Endler PC, Pongratz W, Van Wijk R, Kastberger G, Haidvogl M. Effects
of highly diluted sucussed thyroxine on metamorphosis of highland frogs,
Berlin J Res Hom. 1991;1:151-160.
Endler PC, Pongratz W, Van Wijk R, Waltl K, Hilgers H, Brandmaier R.
Transmission of hormone information by non-molecular means, FASEB
J. 1994;8:A400.
217
Endler PC, Pongratz W, Van Wijk R, Wiegant F, Waltl K, Gehrer M,

Hilgers H. A zoological example on ultra high dilution research. In:
Endler PC, Schulte J (eds.): Ultra High Dilution. Physiology and Physics.
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 1994:39-68.
Endler PC, Pongratz W. On effects of agitated highly diluted thyroxine (E-30).
Comprehensive report, available at the Institute for Zoology. University
of Graz, Universitätsplatz 2, A-8010 Graz, 1994.
Endler PC, Schulte, J. Ultra High Dilution. Physiology and Physics. Dordrecht:
Kluwer Academic Publ, 1994.
Fiore E. You Have Been Here Before. New York: Ballantine, 1978.
Forget-Dubois N, Boivin M, Dionne G, Pierce T, Tremblay RE, Perusse
D. A longitudinal twin study of the genetic and environmental etiology of
maternal hostile-reactive behavior during infancy and toddlerhood. Infant
Behav Dev. 2007 Aug;30(3):453-65.
Gerber R. Vibrational Healing. Sante Fe: Bear, 1988.
Goldberg B. Past Lives, Future Lives. New York: Ballantine, 1982.
Gould SJ. Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the nature of history.
New York: Penguin Books, 1989.
Grad B. A Telekinetic Effect on Plant Growth. Intl Jnl Parapsy. 1964;6:473.
Grad B. The 'Laying on of Hands': Implications for Psychotherapy,
Gentling, and the Placebo Effect. Jnl Amer Soc for Psych Res. 1967
Oct;61(4):286-305.
Grad, B. A telekinetic effect on plant growth II. Experiments involving
treatment of saline in stoppered bottles. Internl J Parapsychol. 1964;6:473-
478, 484-488.
Grasso F, Grillo C, Musumeci F, Triglia A, Rodolico G, Cammisuli F,
Rinzivillo C, Fragati G, Santuccio A, Rodolico M. Photon emission from
normal and tumour human tissues. Experientia. 1992;48:10-13.
218
Grasso F, Musumeci F, Triglia A, Rodolico G, Cammisuli F, Rinzivillo C,

Fragati G, Santuccio A, Rodolico M. In Stanley P, Kricka L (ed).
Ultraweak Luminescence from Cancer Tissues. In Bioluminescence and
Chemiluminescence - Current Status. New York: Wiley, 1991:277-280.
Grasso F, Musumeci F, Triglia A. Yanbastiev M. Borisova, S. Self-
irradiation effect on yeast cells. Photochemistry and Photobiology.
1991;54(1):147-149.
Hadji L, Arnoux B, Benveniste J. Effect of dilute histamine on coronary
flow of guinea-pig isolated heart. FASEB J. 1991;5:A1583.
Hagins WA, Penn RD, Yoshikami S. Dark current and photocurrent in
retinal rods. Biophys J. 1970 May;10(5):380-412.
Hagins WA, Robinson WE, Yoshikami S. Ionic aspects of excitation in
rod outer segments.
Hagins WA, Yoshikami S. Ionic mechanisms in excitation of
photoreceptors. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1975 Dec 30;264:314-25.
Hahnemann S. Oreganon of Homeopathic Medicine. New York: W. Radde,
1843.
Halpern S. Tuning the Human Instrument. Palo Alto, CA: Spectrum Research
Institute, 1978.
Hamel P. Through Music to the Self: How to Appreciate and Experience
Music. Boulder: Shambala, 1979.
Hameroff SR, Kaszniak A, Scott AC (eds.): Toward a Science of
Consciousness - The First Tucson Discussions and Debates. Cambridge:
MIT Press, 1996.
Hameroff SR, Penrose R. Conscious events as orchestrated spacetime
selections. J Consc Studies. 1996;3(1):36-53.
Hameroff SR, Smith, S, Watt.R. Nonlinear electrodynamics in cytoskeletal
protein lattices. In: Adey W, Lawrence A (eds.), Nonlinear Electrodynamics in
Biological Systems. 1984:567-583.
219
Hameroff SR, Watt, R. Information processing in microtubules. J Theor

Biology. 1982;98:549-561.
Hameroff SR. Coherence in the cytoskeleton: Implications for biological
information processing. In: Fröhlich H. (ed.): Biological Coherence and
Response to External Stimuli. Springer, Berlin-New York 1988, pp.242-264.
Hameroff SR. Light is heavy: Wave mechanics in proteins - A microtubule
hologram model of consciousness. Proceedings 2nd. International Congress on
Psychotronic Research. Monte Carlo, 1975:168-169.
Hameroff SR. Ultimate Biocomputing - Biomolecular Consciousness and
Nanotechnology. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1987.
Hameroff, SR. Ch'i: A neural hologram? Microtubules, bioholography and
acupuncture. Am J Chin Med. 1974;2(2):163-170.
Hardin P. Transcription regulation within the circadian clock: the E-box
and beyond. J Biol Rhythms. 2004 Oct;19(5):348-60.
Harlow HF, Dodsworth RO, Harlow MK. Total social isolation in
monkeys. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1965.
Harlow HF. Development of affection in primates. In Bliss E (ed): Roots of
Behavior. New York: Harper, 1962: 157-166.
Harlow HF. Early social deprivation and later behavior in the monkey. In:
Abrams A, Gurner H, Tomal J (eds): Unfinished tasks in the behavioral sciences.
Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins. 1964: 154-173.
Haye-Legrand I, Norel X, Labat C, Benveniste J, Brink C. Antigenic
contraction of guinea pig tracheal preparations passively sensitized with
monoclonal IgE: pharmacological modulation. Int Arch Allergy Appl
Immunol. 1988;87(4):342-8.
Hoyle F. Evolution from Space. Londong: JM Dent, 1981 Huffman C.
Archytas of Tarentum: Pythagorean, philosopher and Mathematician King.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Hur YM, Rushton JP. Genetic and environmental contributions to
220
prosocial behaviour in 2- to 9-year-old South Korean twins. Biol Lett. 2007

Aug 28.
Inaba H. INABA Biophoton. Exploratory Research for Advanced
Technology. Japan Science and Technology Agency. 1991.
http://www.jst.go.jp/erato/
project/isf_P/isf_P.html. Acc. 2006 Nov.
Ivanovic-Zuvic F, de la Vega R, Ivanovic-Zuvic N, Renteria P. Affective
disorders and solar activity. Actas Esp Psiquiatr. 2005 Jan-Feb;33(1):7-12.
Jahn R, Dunne B, Nelson R, Dobyns Y, Bradish G. Correlations of
random binary sequences with pre-stated operator intention: A review of
a 12-year program. J Sci Expl. 1997; 11(3):345-368.
Jahn R, Dunne B, Nelson R. Engineering anomalies research. J Sci Expl.
1987;1(1):21-50.
Jahn R, Dunne B. Science of the subjective. J Sci Expl. 1997;11(2):201-
224.
Jahn R, Dunne, B. Margins of Reality: the Role of Consciousness in the
Physical World. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1987.
Jahn R, Nelson R, Dunne B. Variance Effects in REG Series Score
Distributions, Technical Note PEAR 85001. Princeton Engineering
Anomalies Research, Princeton Univ. 1985 June.
Johanson D. Ancestors. New York: Villard Books, 1994.
Johari H. Ayurvedic Massage: Traditional Indian Techniques for
Balancing Body and Mind. Rochester, VT: Healing Arts, 1996.
Johari H. Chakras. Rochester, VT: Destiny, 1987.
Johnston A. A spatial property of the retino-cortical mapping. Spatial
Vision. 1986;1(4):319-331.
Karnstedt J. Ions and Consciousness. Whole Self. 1991 Spring.
Keil J, Stevenson I. Do cases of the reincarnation type show similar
221
features over many years? A study of Turkish cases. J. Sci. Exploration.

1999;13(2) 189-198.Pasricha S. Claims of reincarnation: An Empirical Study of
Cases in India. New Delhi: Harman, 1990.
Kinoshameg SA, Persinger MA. Suppression of experimental allergic
encephalomyelitis in rats by 50-nT, 7-Hz amplitude-modulated nocturnal
magnetic fields depends on when after inoculation the fields are applied. J
Neulet. 2004;08:18.
Kubler-Ross E. On Life After Death. Berkeley, CA: Celestial Arts, 1991.
Lafrenière, G. The material Universe is made purely out of Aether. Matter
is made of Waves. 2002: http://www.glafreniere.com/matter.htm. Acc. 2007
June.
Langhinrichsen-Rohling J, Palarea RE, Cohen J, Rohling ML. Breaking up
is hard to do: unwanted pursuit behaviors following the dissolution of a
romantic relationship. Violence Vict. 2000 Spring;15(1):73-90.
Litime M, Aïssa J, Benveniste J. Antigen signaling at high dilution.
FASEB Jnl. 1993;7: A602.
Lovelock, J. Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth. Oxford: Oxford Press,
1979.
Lucas A, Morley R, Cole T, Lister G, Leeson-Payne C. Breast milk and
subsequent intelligence quotient in children born premature. Lancet.
1992;339:261-264.
Lucas WB (ed). Regression Therapy: A Handbook for Professionals. Past-
Life Therapy. Crest Park, CA: Deep Forest Press, 1993.
MacKay D. Science, Chance, and Providence. Oxford: Oxford Univ Press,
1978.
Maes HH, Silberg JL, Neale MC, Eaves LJ. Genetic and cultural
transmission of antisocial behavior: an extended twin parent model. Twin
Res Hum Genet. 2007 Feb;10(1):136-50.
Marasanov SB, Matveev II. Correlation between protracted premedication
222
and complication in cancer patients operated on during intense solar

activity. Vopr Onkol. 2007;53(1):96-9.
Marks C. Commissurotomy, Consciousness, and Unity of Mind.
Cambridge: MIT Press, 1981.
Marks L. The Unity of the Senses: Interrelations among the Modalities.
New York: Academic Press, 1978.
Mayr E. Toward a New Philosophy of Biology: Observations of an
evolutionist. Boston: Belknap Press, 1988.
Melzack R, Wall P. Pain Mechanisms: A New Theory. Science.
1965;150:171-179.
Melzack R. Evolution of the neuromatrix theory of pain. The prithvi raj
lecture: presented at the third world congress of world institute of pain,
barcelona 2004. Pain Pract. 2005 Jun;5(2):85-94.
Melzack R. Pain: past, present and future. Can J Exp Psychol. 1993
Dec;47(4):615-29.
Melzack R. Pain – an overview. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1999
Oct;43(9):880-4.
Milgram S. Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View. New York:
Harper, 1974.
Mills A. A replication study: Three cases of children in northern India
who are said to remember a previous life," J. Sci. Exploration 3, No. 2
(1989) pp. 133-184Mills A. Moslem cases of the reincarnation type in
northern India: A test of the hypothesis of imposed identification, Part I:
Analysis of 26 cases. J. Sci. Exploration. 1990;4(2): 171-188.
Mishkin M, Appenzeller T. The Anatomy of Memory. Sci. Am. 1987 June.
Mishkin M. Memory in monkeys severely impaired by combined but not
by separate removal of amygdala and hippocampus. Nature. 1978;273:
297-298.
223
Mitchell JL. Out-of-Body Experiences: A Handbook. New York: Ballantine,

1981.
Monod J. Chance and Necessity. New York: Vintage, 1972.
Monroe R. Far Journeys. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co., 1985.
Monroe R. Journeys Out of the Body. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press, 1977.
Moody R. Coming Back: A Psychiatrist Explores Past-Life Journeys. New
York: Bantam Books, 1991.
Moody, R. Life After Life: The Investigation of a Phenomenon - Survival
of Bodily Death. New York: Bantam, 1975.
Moody, R. Reflections on Life After Life: More Important Discoveries In
The Ongoing Investigation Of Survival Of Life After Bodily Death. New
York: Bantam, 1977.
Moore RY. Circadian Rhythms: A Clock for the Ages. Science 1999 June
25;284(5423):2102 – 2103.
Moore RY. Neural control of the pineal gland. Behav Brain Res.
1996;73(1-2):125-30.
Moore RY. Organization and function of a central nervous system
circadian oscillator: the suprachiasmatic hypothalamic nucleus. Fed Proc.
1983 Aug;42(11):2783-9.
Morey DF. The early evolution of the domestic dog. Amer Sci. 1994;
82:336–347.
Morse M. Closer to the Light. New York: Ivy Books, 1990.
Mumby DG, Wood ER, Pinel J. Object-recognition memory is only
mildly impaired in rats with lesions of the hippocampus and amygdala.
Psychobio. 1992;20: 18-27.
Murchie G. The Seven Mysteries of Life. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Company, 1978.
224
Murphy R. Organon Philosophy Workbook. Blacksburg, VA: HANA, 1994.

Musaev AV, Nasrullaeva SN, Zeinalov RG. Effects of solar activity on
some demographic indices and morbidity in Azerbaijan with reference to
A. L. Chizhevsky's theory. Vopr Kurortol Fizioter Lech Fiz Kult. 2007 May-
Jun;(3):38-42.
Netheron M. Past Lives Therapy. New York: Morrow, 1978.
Ostrander S, Schroeder L, Ostrander N. Super-Learning. New York: Delta,
1979.
Otani S. Memory trace in prefrontal cortex: theory for the cognitive
switch. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2002 Nov;77(4):563-77.
Otsu A, Chinami M, Morgenthale S, Kaneko Y, Fujita D, Shirakawa T.
Correlations for number of sunspots, unemployment rate, and suicide
mortality in Japan. Percept Mot Skills. 2006 Apr;102(2):603-8.
Ott J. Color and Light: Their Effects on Plants, Animals, and People
(Series of seven articles in seven issues). International Journal for Biosocial
Research. 1985-1991.
Palmer J. Hit-contingent response biases in Helmut Schmidt’s automated
precognition experiments. J Parapsy. 1997:61; 135-141.
Partonen T, Haukka J, Nevanlinna H, Lonnqvist J. Analysis of the
seasonal pattern in suicide. J Affect Disord. 2004 Aug;81(2):133-9.
Petiot JF, Sainte-Laudy J, Benveniste J. Interpretation of results on a
human basophil degranulation test. Ann Biol Clin (Paris). 1981;39(6):355-9.
Pittalwala I. Research Shows Earth’s Earliest Animal Ecosystem Was
Complex and included Sexual Reproduction. UC Riverside Newsroom. 2008
Mar 20.
Plotkin H. Darwin Machines and the Nature of Knowledge: Concerning
adaptations, instinct and the evolution of intelligence. New York:
Penguin, 1994.
225
Poitevin B, Davenas E, Benveniste J. In vitro immunological

degranulation of human basophils is modulated by lung histamine and
Apis mellifica. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1988 Apr;25(4):439-44.
Poitevin B, Davenas E, Benveniste J. In vitro immunological
degranulation of human basophils is modulated by Lung histamine and
Apis mellifica. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 1988;25: 439-444.
Polkinghorne J. Science and Providence. Boston: Shambhala Publications,
1989.
Pongratz W, Endler PC, Poitevin B, Kartnig T. Effect of extremely
diluted plant hormone on cell culture, Proc. 1995 AAAS Ann. Meeting,
Atlanta, 1995.
Popp F Chang J. Mechanism of interaction between electromagnetic fields
and living organisms. Science in China. 2000 Series C;43(5):507-518.
Popp F, Chang J, Herzog A, Yan Z, Yan Y. Evidence of non-classical
(squeezed) light in biological systems. Physics Lett. 2002;293:98-102.
Popp F, Yan Y. Delayed luminescence of biological systems in terms of
coherent states. Phys.Lett. 2000;293:91-97.
Popp F. Molecular Aspects of Carcinogenesis. In Deutsch E, Moser K,
Rainer H, Stacher A (eds.). Molecular Base of Malignancy. Stuttgart:
G.Thieme, 1976:47-55.
Popp F. Properties of biophotons and their theoretical implications. Indian
J Exper Biology. 2003 May;41:391-402.
Protheroe WM, Captiotti ER, Newsom GH. Exploring the Universe.
Columbus, OH: Merrill, 1989.
Puthoff H, Targ R, May E. Experimental Psi Research: Implication for
Physics. AAAS Proceedings of the 1979 Symposium on the Role of Consciousness
in the Physical World. 1981.
Puthoff H, Targ R. A Perceptual Channel for Information Transfer Over
Kilometer distances: Historical Perspective and Recent Research. Proc.
226
IEEE. 1976;64(3):329-254.
Radin D. The Conscious Universe. San Francisco: HarperEdge, 1997.
Raff RA, Kaufman TC. Embryos, Genes and Evolution. New York:
Macmillan, 1983.
Reilly D, Taylor M, Beattie N, Campbell J, McSharry C, Aitchison T,
Carter R, Stevenson R. Is evidence for homoeopathy reproducible? Lancet,
1994;344: 1601-1606.
Reilly D. The puzzle of homeopathy. J Altern Complement Med. 2001;7
Suppl 1:S103-9.
Rieder M. Mission to Millboro. Nevada City, CA: Blue Dolphin, 1995.
Rieder M. Return to Millboro: The Reincarnation Drama Continues.
Nevada City, CA: Blue Dolphin, 1995.
Ring K. Life at Death: A Scientific Investigation of the Near-Death
Experience. New York: Quill, 1982.
Sabom M. Light and Death: One Doctor's Fascinating Account of Near
Death Experiences. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 1998.
Sabom, M. Recollections of Death: A Medical Investigation. New York:
Simon & Schuster, 1982.
Sanders R. Slow brain waves play key role in coordinating complex
activity. UC Berkeley News. 2006 Sep 14.
Schlebusch KP, Maric-Oehler W, Popp FA. Biophotonics in the infrared
spectral range reveal acupuncture meridian structure of the body. J Altern
Complement Med. 2005 Feb;11(1):171-3.
Schlebusch KP, Maric-Oehler W, Popp FA. Biophotonics in the infrared
spectral range reveal acupuncture meridian structure of the body. J Altern
Complement Med. 2005 Feb;11(1):171-3.
Schmidt H, Quantum processes predicted? New Sci. 1969 Oct 16.
227
Serway R. Physics For Scientists & Engineers. Philadelphia: Harcourt Brace,

1992.
Shaffer D. Developmental Psychology: Theory, Research and
Applications. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1985.
Sharp KC. After the Light. New York: William Morrow & Co., 1995.
Shui-Yin Lo. Anomalous State of Ice. Mod Phys Lttrs. 1996;10(19): 909-
919.
Shupak NM, Prato FS, Thomas AW. Human exposure to a specific
pulsed magnetic field: effects on thermal sensory and pain thresholds.
Neurosci Lett. 2004 Jun 10;363(2):157-62.
Sicher F, Targ E, Moore D, Smith H. A Randomized Double-Blind Study
of the Effect of Distant Healing in a Population With Advanced AIDS.
Targ R, Katra J, Brown D, Wiegand W. Viewing the future: A pilot study
with an error-detecting protocol. J Sci Explo, 9:3, pp. 367-380, 1995.
Simpson G. The Major Features of Evolution. New York: Columbia Univ
Press, 1953.
Smith CW. Coherence in living biological systems. Neural Network World.
1994:4(3):379-388.
Smith MJ. The Influence on Enzyme Growth By the 'Laying on of Hands:
Dimenensions of Healing. Los Altos, California: Academy of
Parapsychology and Medicine, 1973.
Soul Has Weight, Physician Thinks. New York Times. 1907 March 11:5.
Speed Of Light May Not Be Constant, Physicist Suggests. Science Daily.
1999 Oct 6.
Spence A. Basic Human Anatomy. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Commings,
1986.
Spetner L. Not By Chance! -Shattering The Modern Theory of Evolution.
New York: The Judaica Press, 1997.
228
Spillane M. Good Vibrations, A Sound ‘Diet’ for Plants. The Growing Edge.
1991 Spring.
Squire LR, Zola-Morgan S. The medial temporal lobe memory system.
Science. 1991;253(5026):1380-1386.
Stanford, C. B. The hunting ecology of wild chimpanzees: Implications
for the evolutionary ecology of Pliocene hominids. American Anthropologist.
1996;98: 96-113.
Steck B. Effects of optical radiation on man. Light Resch Techn.
1982;14:130-141.
Stevenson I, Samararatne G. Three new cases of the reincarnation type in
Sri Lanka with written records made before verification. J. Sci. Exploration.
1988;2(2): 217-238.
Stevenson I. Cases of the Reincarnation Type. Charlottesville, VA: Univ.
of Virginia Press. Vol. 1 Ten Cases in India (1975) Vol. 2 Ten Cases in Sri
Lanka, 1977. Vol. 3 Twelve Cases in Lebanon and Turkey, 1980. Vol. 4
Twelve Cases in Thailand and Burma, 1983.
Stevenson I. Children Who Remember Previous Lives: A Question of
Reincarnation. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press,
1987.Stevenson I. American children who claim to remember previous
lives. J. Nervous and Mental Disease. 1983;171: 742-748.
Stevenson I. European Cases of the Reincarnation Type. Jefferson, NC:
McFarland and Co., 2003.
Stevenson I. Reincarnation and Biology: A Contribution to the Etiology
of Birthmarks and Birth Defects. (2 volumes). Westport, CN: Praeger
Publishers, 1997.
Stevenson I. Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation. New York: American
Society for Psychical Research, 1967.
Stevenson I.Where Reincarnation and Biology Intersect. Westport, CN:
Praeger, 1997.
229
Stoupel E, Babyev E, Mustafa F, Abramson E, Israelevich P, Sulkes J.

Acute myocardial infarction occurrence: Environmental links - Baku
2003-2005 data. Med Sci Monit. 2007 Aug;13(8):BR175-179.
Stoupel E, Kalediene R, Petrauskiene J, Gaizauskiene A, Israelevich P,
Abramson E, Sulkes J. Monthly number of newborns and environmental
physical activity. Medicina Kaunas. 2006;42(3):238-41.
Stoupel E, Monselise Y, Lahav J. Changes in autoimmune markers of the
anti-cardiolipin syndrome on days of extreme geomamagnetic activity. J
Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol. 2006;17(4):269-78.
Stoupel EG, Frimer H, Appelman Z, Ben-Neriah Z, Dar H, Fejgin MD,
Gershoni-Baruch R, Manor E, Barkai G, Shalev S, Gelman-Kohan Z,
Reish O, Lev D, Davidov B, Goldman B, Shohat M. Chromosome
aberration and environmental physical activity: Down syndrome and solar
and cosmic ray activity, Israel, 1990-2000. Int J Biometeorol. 2005
Sep;50(1):1-5.
Strange BA, Dolan RJ. Anterior medial temporal lobe in human cognition:
memory for fear and the unexpected. Cognit Neuropsychiatry. 2006
May;11(3):198-218.
Suppes P, Han B, Epelboim J, Lu ZL. Invariance of brain-wave
representations of simple visual images and their names. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences Psychology-BS. 1999;96(25):14658-
14663.
Targ R, Puthoff H. Information transfer under conditions of sensory
shielding. Nature. 1975;251:602-607.
Thakur CP, Sharma D. Full moon and crime. Br Med J. 1984 December
22; 289(6460): 1789-1791.
Thomas Y, Litime H, Benveniste J. Modulation of human neutrophil
activation by "electronic" phorbol myristate acetate (PMA). FASEB Jnl.
1996;10: A1479.
Thomas Y, Schiff M, Belkadi L, Jurgens P, Kahhak L, Benveniste J.
230
Activation of human neutrophils by electronically transmitted phorbol-

myristate acetate. Med Hypoth. 2000;54: 33-39.
Thomas Y, Schiff M, Litime M, Belkadi L, Benveniste J. Direct
transmission to cells of a molecular signal (phorbol myristate acetate,
PMA) via an electronic device. FASEB Jnl. 1995;9: A227.
Thomas-Anterion C, Jacquin K, Laurent B. Differential mechanisms of
impairment of remote memory in Alzheimer's and frontotemporal
dementia. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2000 Mar-Apr;11(2):100-6.
Thompson D. On Growth and Form. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ Press,
1992.
Tompkins, P, Bird C. The Secret Life of Plants. New York: Harper & Row,
1973.
Triglia A, La Malfa G, Musumeci F, Leonardi C, Scordino A. Delayed
luminsecence as an indicator of tomato fruit quality. J Food Sci.
1998;63:512-515.
Tsuei JJ, Lam Jr. F, Zhao Z. Studies in Bioenergetic Correlations –
Bioenergetic Regulatory Measurement Instruments and Devices. Am J
Acupunct. 1988;16:345-9.
Tucker J. Life Before Life: A Scientific Investigation of Children's
Memories of Previous Lives. New York: St. Martin's, 2005.
Vaquero JM, Gallego MC. Sunspot numbers can detect pandemic
influenza A: the use of different sunspot numbers. Med Hypotheses.
2007;68(5):1189-90.
Vargha-Khadem F, Polkey CE. A review of cognitive outcome after
hemidecortication in humans. Adv Exp Med Biol. 1992;325:137-51.
Vyasadeva S. Srimad Bhagavatam. Approx rec 4000 BCE.
Wagenaar, W. Generation of random sequences by human subjects: A
critical survey of literature. Psych Bulletin. 1972:77(1):65-72.
231
Wambach H. Reliving Past Lives. New York: Bantam, 1978.Fiore E. You

Have Been Here Before. New York: Ballantine, 1978.
Wayne RK. Molecular evolution of the dog family. Trends Genet. 1993;
9:218–224.
Weiss B. Many Lives, Many Masters. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1988.
White J, Krippner S (eds). Future Science: Life Energies & the Physics of
Paranormal Phenomena. Garden City: Anchor, 1977.
Whitfield KE, King G, Moller S, Edwards CL, Nelson T, Vandenbergh
D. Concordance rates for smoking among African-American twins. J Natl
Med Assoc. 2007 Mar;99(3):213-7.
Whittaker E. History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity. New
York: Nelson LTD, 1953.
Whitton J. Life Between Life. New York: Warner, 1986.
Winchester AM. Biology and its Relation to Mankind. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold, 1969.
Wixted JT. A Theory About Why We Forget What We Once Knew.
CurrDir Psychol Sci. 2005;14(1):6-9.
Wolf, M. Beyond the Point Particle - A Wave Structure for the Electron.
Galilean Electrodynamics. 1995 Oct;6(5): 83-91.
Wood M. The Book of Herbal Wisdom. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic, 1997.
Woolger R. Other Lives, Other Selves. New York: Bantam, 1988.
Youbicier-Simo BJ, Boudard F, Meckaouche M, Bastide M, Baylé JD. The
effects of embryonic bursectomy and in ovo administration of highly
diluted bursin on adrenocorticotropic and immune response of chicken,
Int. J. Immunother. 1993;9:169-190.
Zhang C, Popp, F., Bischof, M.(eds.). Electromagnetic standing waves as
background of acupuncture system. Current Development in Biophysics -
the Stage from an Ugly Duckling to a Beautiful Swan. Hangzhou:
232
Hangzhou University Press, 1996.
233

Evolution of The Self

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Evolution of The Self

Caricato da

Copyright:

Evolution of the Self

Publishers Cataloging in Publication Data

So we need to change our perspective on living organisms from

tations through generations of breeding have illustrated mecha-

accidental evolution. Yet the DNA molecule itself, being comprised

observed any lifeless chemical or chemicals develop the desire to

it is essential that this reality is not ignored or factored out of the

an underlying motivation to remain alive, the concepts of the theory

First accidental evolutionists make a huge leap assuming that life

While these theories might resonate as we consider already devel-

Furthermore, many of these transitional species would not be so

occurred about 65 million years ago. Outside of the water-borne

Sometimes, the archeologist will make rough estimates of age sim-

The evidence found so far indicates otherwise. As mentioned earlier

mation. Yet modern geologists seem to be present their data as if

sands of years, consumption rates will not vary with environmental

Assuming the 20% variance at 5,000 years, would 50% at 50,000 be

Mutated Complexity within a Random System?

a seemingly random part of a single cell organism’s uniform cell

More importantly, are we saying that all these complexities acciden-

sheer luck, these dumb chemicals ended up building the complex

kinds of odds (one chance in 103000 ) why would living organisms

While we might consider the possibility that stronger offspring

Accidental evolutionists seem to be saying that an accidental family

tions. We do not debate this. However, an organism will only make

An explosion or other traumatic accident might leave ones torso

son within is still present. Though handicapped, the person remains

jority of cells in the body will participate in cell division. Following

air we breathe, we can accurately make the following statement: The

are initiating stimuli and subsequent responses from various tissues

be no analysis or learning experience from our activities. These re-

shoplift? In that case, we should be able to find that certain bio-

This is not to mean that injected biochemicals cannot stimulate a

Although these efforts are laudable, science has unfortunately suc-

organism if there is a living force present in that organism. A dead

counted for a 29% genetic influence at 18 months and 25% at 30

tionary choices of their drivers. In other words, their differences

void – or merging into “everything” – sometimes referred to as the

the existence of individuality. The very definition of consciousness

body. Furthermore, we distinguish the term living organism as a

chemicals and barriers of defense. This is evident in MDROs –

How do the bacteria know which bacteria (and biochemicals) to

conscious being is non-physical. This means that the physical body

Mind versus Consciousness

A combination of these on-off states or bits makes up a byte. A

These electromagnetic pulses through neurons make up a series of

music recorded by the mind. We may hum or sing the words of a

The planaria worm (Dugesia dorotocephala) was Dr. James McCon-

This research underscores some of the studies referenced earlier,

The intentional reflections of the self are translated through the

CPU. This code is then translated into operating system instructions

the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Janet is attributed

The method of hypnosis in psychiatric treatment is based upon the

A distant relative of behaviorism is functionalism. This concept was

(magnetic resonance imagery), PET (positron emission tomogra-

located in specific brain neurons. Dr. Lashley trained mice to par-

measures the voltage potential differences among different regions

during that activity. Beta waves reflect a state of focused attention

Ripples appear to transduce through the medial temporal lobe, no-

research papers documented how the mind integrates batches of

pressing or finger flicking. Dr. Libet’s research compared three

drite, however. Sensory nerves are also typically longer – sometimes

The locations of these nerve groupings will be common. Most

One group of neurons will submit instructions to the toes, while

Each of these has a slightly different function, but together they

coordinated with signals passing through the vestibular system.