A convergence is taking place aligning alien disclosure, the mystifying Clade X, and taxonomy clashing in the epoch battle between the Biblical world and Darwinism. What is at stake? The very definition of being human. Will humanity have the ability to survive?
On May 15, 2018 Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security will host a tabletop exercise to illustrate high-level strategic decisions and policies that the United States and the world will need to pursue in order to prevent a severe pandemic. That exercise is named Clade X. The simulation will convene a meeting of 10 government leaders who hold senior leadership positions within the government. These players will be presented with a scenario that highlights unresolved real-world policy issues. Clade X will be held in the manner of two other catastrophic exercises Dark Winter and Atlantic Storm. Clade X will be funded by the Open Philanthropy Project. Unlike the previous exercises embedded in Clade X is a provocative name with a dual purpose meaning.
Veiled secrecy is associated with Clade X. There is a new family in town which might leap out of any science fiction movie such as Jurassic Park. The family members are the Orciraptor and Viridiraptor who hold distinct ecological niches in aquatic ecosystems. They are 'necrophytophagous' whose mission as an organism is dedicated to the feeding and devouring until its prey is dead. While the later member is a 'parasitoid' Protist (one celled parasite). The Orciraptor and Viridiraptor belong to Clade X. The term raptorial or ‘feeders’ implies they are predatory, specifically grasping its prey while it consumes it. They have a nucleus and mitochondria therefore are labeled 18S ribosomal DNA.
18S and 16S are often used in biological warfare testing. These proteins are amplified using universal primers containing DNA barcodes and then released, while researcher’s voyeur the symbiotic explosion.
Past biological warfare tests have assured the public that the aerosol testing is safe and non-toxic, only to later come out and admit, in fact, poisonous to human, animal, and plant populations.
Were the creators of the John Hopkins experiment unaware or naive on the implications of the name Clade X? It is highly unlikely given that the facility collaborates and does research with ribosomal DNA.
From the time of Aristotle, possibly earlier, life was classified in taxonomical rank, in groups, within a hierarchy. The ranks are species, genus, family, order, class, phylum, kingdom, domain etc… The hierarchy begins with the universals and drills down to the particulars for the purposes of species identification.
Biological taxonomy, also known as typology, stems from the works of Aristotle and is commonly interpreted as being anti-evolutionary. Essentially it entails that a species and higher taxa possess definitional essences that define them in terms of necessary and sufficient, intrinsic, unchanging, and ahistorical properties. For instance, a human will always be a human.
A classical work by Linnaeus in his 1758 edition of Systema Naturae listed 4400 species known to science. Through the years the number of known species grew and therefore it became harder to accommodate them with the standard seven categorical ranks. Taxonomists invented new categories, such as subfamily, superorder, and tribe. Today there are over 1.5 million described species, perhaps millions more uncategorized.
Biological Clade Coup d'Etat
To accommodate a plethora of ‘new’ species, aliens, reanimation of extinct species and entities, genetically modified organisms, and synthetic biology, a new system was coined by Julian Huxley in 1957. It would be based upon clade instead of rank.
Clade comes from the Ancient Greek “branch” and is a group of organisms that consist of a common ancestor and all its lineal descendants. It is the modern usurper of the Tree of Life, but unlike the Linneaus hierarchy, clades may be an individual, population, or species; nested one in another; and then branching out. The idea of a clade did not exist before Darwin. Clades are based by necessity only on internal or external morphological similarities between organisms. Defining clades intentionally presupposes that their definitions are analytically true, and hence not amenable to revision in the light of new knowledge. If we are to think of them as analytic definitions, then, when phylogenetic definitions point or refer to some hypothetical ancestor, no new knowledge of phylogeny can indicate any flaw in those definitions. It is considered an absolute.
Claudistics is now known as the International PhyloCode. It is evolutionary taxonomy based upon clades verified by fossil evidence. In claudistics, humans are categorized in the same clade with reptiles, birds, and tetrapods. The very concept is troubling, confusing, and a dangerous for a person of faith. Nevertheless, academia has been implementing this system over the last 10 years in plain sight.
German biologist Emil Henning is considered to be the founder of the PhyloCode (cladistics). He proposed a classification system which represented repeated branchings of the family tree, as opposed to the previous systems, which put organisms on a "ladder", with supposedly more "advanced" organisms at the top.
The PhyloCode was first proposed to academia in 1968. A set of rules governing species names was included in the draft. There was deep division within the participants and no consensus could be made as to whether the system should be binomen (binary naming in two parts, for instance Homo sapien) or epithet based (naming with byname, description, or attribution, such as Richard the Lion-Hearted).
A few years after the PhyloCode was proposed, in 1975, a working group convened a decision made to genetically modify all life on earth. The implications of this effort encompass the world as we know it, or used to know it.
Breaks God given barriers between species
Claims the right to semantic trickery, such as what is ‘natural’
Creates distinctions between kinds/classes and individuals by what they contribute.
Defines what is ‘real’ and what is not ‘real,’ in essence, reality itself.
Treating species as kinds or nominal classes will entail that they have no real existence and that they are purely conventional groups of organisms.
Rejects the issues of reality and spatiotemporal localization and the metaphysical (God, afterlife, etc…) concerns of individualism
It establishes a war between classes and individuals
Traditional ranks have been eliminated so anything can be related to anything
Holds that individuals are unsatisfactory
Abandons typological thinking which the bible clearly endorses
Exterminates what it means to be human with a new convoluted system
Initial argument for individuality of species and taxa was given free reign in the systematics literature becoming intertwined with a number of more or less related issues, making it virtually impossible to discuss in isolation.
Establishes ‘systematization’ consisting of the ordering of particular things into systems. Systems are more inclusive wholes, based on the relationships that their parts exhibit one to another due to a natural process.
Darwin views species as concrete entities denying the metaphysical and timelessness
Purging of the metaphysical in order to unify the sciences
Contrary to the Bible the nominalist view is that although nature makes things similar and different, the classification of them into kinds or classes is the workmanship of men.
Species are considered as individuals
Urges us to reconsider the standard conception of ‘kinds’ (i.e. question Genesis 1:24)
Changes what is true and what is false in light of revisitability of ‘kind’ definitions by empirical science
Adoption of homeostatic property clusters (HPCs) Homeostatic property cluster terms are defined by the associated property clusterings understood as ongoing phenomena in the world. An example is the recent emphasis on syndromic clusters in medicine.
Homeostasis is imperfect and by definition can evolve over time.
A pre-Darwinian biologist categorizing species IS NOT considered because he would have used fundamental units of God and His creation. He is predetermined to be offering a false and revisable definition reflecting posteriori judgment.
Although we had no say, on May 24, 2007 the Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature (CPN), consisting of 12 elected members from the International Society for Phylogenetic Nomenclature (ISPN), adopted a new article in the International Code of Phylogenetic Nomenclature (ICPN or PhyloCode) addressing the naming of species in the context of phylogenetic nomenclature. It took ten years to arrive at this decision to introduce a new biological system because it was so controversial. The new system threw off the chains of traditional identification system including the ranks of the old system.
Implementation began using dual nomenclatures. Gradually over time only the International PhyloCode was published. Policies are based upon this theoretical system. Along with the adoption of the clade system will be new burdensome and confusing regulations, to the degree, no man has experienced until this point in history.
The Trouble with Aliens
Our Galaxy has 100 billion planets with 20% of them in the habitable zone. That is an expanse of space capable of producing a biosphere. Potentially that could mean 200,000 life-harboring planets in our Galaxy! This does not include life-forms within the inter-dimensional, underworld, or spiritual realms. Just as one human can change the world, so too, one alien could potentially change life as we know it. To attain alien disclosure hundreds of millions of dollars have recently been invested in astrobiology research and initiatives.
In light of the transition to the PhyloCode, what will aliens be like?
We are told that complexity is derived from a handful of extreme events known as major transitions or catastrophism which forced life to adapt to more hostile environments. It is assumed that since these events have happened on Earth it is favorable that they would also occur on other planets and in other dimensions as well.
The quest for extra-terrestrials requires justification on firm theoretical grounds for a specific subset race of aliens: complex ones. After all, it is much more attractive if we find multifaceted life as opposed to finding single cell organisms. Within this framework complexity assumes that different parts or units work together towards a common goal or purpose. In life though, sometimes rugged individuality is what is necessary to preserve life and what forges character and physical facets into our lives which lives on throughout the generations.
Natural selection demands that we accept the appearance of design without a designer. With the designer of life (God) and His Divine Providence eliminated the only way life can adapt to its environment and replicate is through natural selection. Through the utilitarian or functional point of view what differentiates life from non-life is only the result of a huge transition or catastrophe.
Natural selection requires a sacrifice. For instance, in a threatening situation our body concentrates (cell and organ cooperation) its energy in its core to survive thereby sacrificing one’s extremities. Our bodies do this by God's design. According to delusional empirical observation for life to be complex there must be major transition involving conflict to our life. That conflict must be eliminated by overcoming the extreme conditions (without God). Some would say, survival of the fittest. Taken to the extreme using this utilitarian theory one would have the obligation as an individual to sacrifice oneself for the greater good.
Natural selection requires sentient cell cooperation and alignment of interests. The very cells that make up our bodies – known as eukaryotic cells – employ alignment of interests. In natural selection all cooperation requires alignment of interests. Proponents of this theory regard each cell in our body as sentient. As a human, you have many cells and organs divinely orchestrated together. While they all cooperate if you are to survive, you are not defined, let’s say, by your gut biome. Proponents of this philosophy frankly declare that you are more gut biome (single cell entities) than human, therefore you are not really human at all. Herein lays the danger.
Due to the rigidity of the clade system, unless empirical evidence is found that we are related to an alien by various descriptors, the alternative is a war between us. The PhyloCode has already eliminated our position as humans and so we will find ourselves not in the primacy role assigned to us by God, but simple waste products to be eliminated, or to become prey (food) for the alien entities. It is critical for us to understand that in the clade system the value of the alien can increase while our position, will continue to diminish.
The environment to accommodate alien entities will be impossible to reconcile. We live in a carbon based system but what if the aliens require a silicon based system? This may be the ultimate reason for geo-engineering the earth. Earth cannot accommodate both humanity and the alien.
Should scientific evidence determine that we are related to these aliens it becomes mandatory to crown our new clade family and embrace them wholeheartedly.
It is a matter of great significance on who or what will govern and operate the rigors of regulation between humanity and the aliens. Since God given human primacy has long since been abandoned, we can surely find no favor in the eyes of whatever judicial system arises to manage the masses.
What can an individual do about these decisions and policies being made without my consent? I need to become proactive. Here are some thoughts: