ADMINISTRATOR’S NOTE —-
Great abominations and sin are increasing and taking place right on front of us other than the elevation and celebration of sodomy and perversions, or the tsunami of unsound doctrine and false teachers which has risen up in the past 30 years or so. Satan has the people of the world by their hearts ad minds, and not only has reinforced how they do not have to believe in or obey God, since he is the father of lies and confusion, but he also has the majority of people convinced they are gods themselves.
Man and woman are speeding along in technologies faster than they can keep up with or understand. Yet they race headlong over the precipice.
Consequences for actions. Judgments coming for our deeds and beliefs.
Creating animals, or plants with living human traits and tissue, mingling of human cells with that of an animal thus making a chimera is an abomination before God our Father and there is no justifiable excuse which can be offered up for this — and cut the dung about how it is a “good thing” and going to save lives and conquer the fear of contracting numerous diseases. This is all founded upon man thinking themselves greater than God just as their master, that old dragon the devil imagines himself greater than God.
Everyone will soon find out the truth.
Sadly, the following increases and it consequences are not yet truly seen, but will be.
Do not be deceived…
Please pay attention to misleading words such as the following which are contained in the article below to erode truth, beguile, coerce, mislead, seduce;
Humans and animals have mixed throughout the Ages in various ways; so, beyond an initial repulsion, what makes a chimera, a human-animal melding, so morally controversial, so potentially threatening to life on Earth?
Humans and animals have “mingled” for work, for food, for life, but never in a human “mingling” to the degree with an animal by implanting human DNA, human tissue in an animal a completely other species came into being — an alien species never created by God nor intended to exist.
What follows in the article below is NOT taking two breeds of dogs with certain traits to come up with a completely new breed, or breeding various breeds of steers to come up with a healthier beef. Not even close. Do not be misled. Do not be confused. Do not be beguiled and seduced.
Do not be deceived…do not allow the scales the world has covering its eyes as it stumbles in darkness serving its master the devil cover your eyes taking you to your death. And that is what lies ahead for all believers and practioners and participants in what follows in the article below.
~ Ken Pullen, A Crooked Path, Saturday, February 13th, 2016
Alien Species … A Brave New World
Tuesday, February 9th 2016
The potential of increasing humanization of animals with emergent human mental and psychological capacities is the risk no one is sure of.
A chimera is a living being composed of cells mixed together from two different organisms, either from the same or different species. Scientific research currently uses chimeras in the form of humanized mice to study inflammatory disease, cancer, infectious disease, and hematopoiesis. By adding thymus and liver cells from an aborted human fetus to a living mouse, its immune system is transformed facilitating research studies. Humans and animals have mixed throughout the Ages in various ways; so, beyond an initial repulsion, what makes a chimera, a human-animal melding, so morally controversial, so potentially threatening to life on Earth?
The mythical Greek chimera is a fire-breathing union of human and animal. Traversing millennia, it now thrives in U.S, UK, and other research labs growing tissue that may end up as liver, kidney, heart, or other transplanted organs. Despite ocular, neurodegenerative, and other applications, fiery controversy attends this mixing of human-animal stem cells or genes.
Based on stem-cell biology and gene-editing technology, scientists can alter the DNA in sheep or pig embryos to circumvent tissue development in favor of the organ they wish to grow. When human stem cells are introduced into the animal, it is hoped that the human cells will assume formation of the missing organ, thus creating a human liver, kidney, heart, etc., which would then be harvested from the animal for use in a transplant operation. Currently, however, scientists merely gather preliminary information observing cell growth and cell fate, about how great the contribution of human cells is to the animals’ bodies, and then they destroy research samples in 28 days. A pig is born in 114 days by contrast.
These are potentially exciting medical advances, particularly if you are on the receiving end. Chimera researchers and scientists began inserting human cells into early sheep and pig embryos in 2014. MIT Technology Review states that 20 pregnancies of pig-human or sheep-human chimeras have been established during the last twelve months in the U.S.  Another three dozen pig transfers have taken place outside the U.S. Yet, biological humanization balances tenuously against the risk of moral humanization; the great fear being creation of a novel sentient being with human qualities.
Thinking Pigs and Standing Sheep
Stanford University stem-cell biologist Hiromitsu Nakauchi experiments with human-sheep chimeras. Offering a disturbing analysis of potential outcomes, Nakauchi noted current contributions by human cells to the animals’ bodies appear to be relatively small.
“If the extent of human cells is 0.5 percent, it’s very unlikely to get thinking pigs or standing sheep,” he says. “But if it’s large, like 40 percent, then we’d have to do something about that.“ (emphasis added)
With 123,000 people on waiting lists for transplant organs and growing daily, the market is poised for a solution. Besides, discoveries may yield other uses and other markets to exploit; this is big business and the free market in action.
“Desperately ill people on organ waiting lists might someday order a chimera and wait less than a year for their own custom organ to be ready. I really don’t see much risk to society,”
Michio Kaku notes,
“Since we are drowning in an ocean of information, the most precious commodity in modern society is wisdom.”
This is never truer than for health-freedom fighters today. We need an expanded definition of health freedom as prior delineations are obsolete in the face of novel life forms. In a recent interview, Stephen Hawking admits further progress in science and technology will create “new ways things can go wrong.”
“We are not going to stop making progress, or reverse it, so we have to recognize the dangers and control them. I’m an optimist, and I believe we can.”
But there are scientific and social implications to be considered; namely the humanization of animals. Chimerism concerns encompass crossing inviolable species borders. These are real concerns leading to real questions; particularly if brought to term, do we put this new creation in a zoo or allow it to live among us? Maybe our days of being human and being animal are numbered, the distinction forever blurred.
Stem-cell research was held up during the last Bush Administration due to fears it would encourage increased abortion rates. Criticism abounds, primed by that action, that the “religious right” which now includes Muslims due to the use of pigs in chimera research, will delay progress. Science unchecked against the moorings of ethics, human dignity, and sanctity is unwise particularly in the face of the sheer magnitude of unknown variables versus known benefits.
Playing With The Fire-breathing Chimera
The “retaining human dignity” argument is flawed, according to Ethics Committee publications. The human is not diminished by an animal becoming more human. This only holds true as long as research guidelines regarding in-vitro chimera studies not be allowed to develop more than the standard 28 days; after that looms the great unknown, namely animals starting to possess human characteristics and features. Others suggest that such characteristics as linguistic capacity, rationality, and a capacity for sufficiently social relationships are inherent only in human relationships. Animal sciences such as ethology, primatology, animal psychology, and behavioral ecology suggest otherwise.
Pablo Ross, a veterinarian and developmental biologist at the University of California, Davis, advises,
“We don’t want to grow them to stages we don’t need to, since that would be more controversial. … My view is that the contribution of human cells is going to be minimal, maybe 3 percent, maybe 5 percent. But what if they contributed to 100 percent of the brain? What if the embryo that develops is mostly human? It’s something that we don’t expect, but no one has done this experiment, so we can’t rule it out.” (emphasis added)
Embryo complementation is a concern because the human cells can multiply, specialize, and potentially contribute at will to any part of the developing animal’s body. Coalescing of animal and human cells with the resulting blurred species distinction is one concern.
Despite the fact that these observational experiments are destroyed after 28 days, it is a grave concern they will not be. France reported a jelly-fish/sheep mix ending up in the food supply. There are religious, ethical, and practical concerns, such as cross-species diseases creating plagues to which humans will have no natural immunity.
In the “smart mouse” model, researcher Steve Goldman cites,
“Within a year, the mouse glial cells had been completely usurped by the human interlopers. The 300,000 human cells each mouse received multiplied until they numbered 12 million, displacing the native cells. We could see the human cells taking over the whole space.” Goldman continues, “It seemed like the mouse counterparts were fleeing to the margins.”
Otherwise said, the mice became measurably smarter. The team stopped short of putting human cells into monkeys and great apes due to ethical concerns. Wolfgang Enard of Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich in Germany, who has shown that mice are better at learning if they have the human Foxp2 gene, which has been linked with human language development noted, “If you make animals more human-like, where do you stop?”
The 1997 book and its 2007 film adaptation The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (original French title: Le Scaphandre et le Papillon) is a memoir by journalist Jean-Dominique Bauby. After suffering a massive stroke that left him with “locked-in syndrome” he blinks his way through the alphabet with the help of a friend to write his experiences of being fully cognizant and unable to “get out.” This is the great fear of the results of chimera research, not for humans but for animals, and is one reason why great apes have been excluded as candidates. How would we know? Helen Keller found a way out. In Bauby and Keller we have sufficient reason to pause. A richer discourse is demanded when the ethics of a novel being are involved.
Despite the fact that scientists from other countries such as Japan move to the U.S. in order to conduct chimera research as it is allowed here (and in the UK with more stringent restrictions), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) – which controls the Federal expenditures on medically-based research – wisely exercised caution, withdrawing funding until ethical and social considerations could be addressed even though NIH was hit with criticism for a fear-based decision, impeding progress. Hiromitsu Nakauchi himself admits,
“What if the embryo that develops is mostly human? It’s something that we don’t expect, but no one has done this experiment, so we can’t rule it out.”
Ethics of Funding Chimera Research
Since the NIH denied funding, other funding sources including California’s State stem-cell agency were sought and came through. The California Institute of Regenerative Medicine, a State agency instituted 10 years ago to bypass political interference from Washington, provided a $6 million grant for Nakauchi’s work.
Government funding in and of itself is a major concern. But when the military gets involved we have to ask “why”? Dr. Daniel Garry, a cardiologist heading a chimera project at the University of Minnesota was awarded a $1.4 million grant from the U.S. Army to attempt growing human hearts in pigs. Dr. Garry was one of 11 who co-authored a letter in November 2015 criticizing the NIH for creating “a threat to progress” that “casts a shadow of negativity” on their work.