Friday, December 5, 2025

Is 3I Atlas a GRAVITY Ship?




 Is 3I Atlas a GRAVITY Ship?



I bring this up because the anomalies noted to date conform rather well to the behavior of a gravity ship engineered to span the stars in a reasonable time frame. The way it works is simple actually. Kinetic energy is conserved and equal to Mass times Velocity squared.  This is conserved.

Thus if you can remove mass into the intersteller medium then velocity squared will rocket upwards.  Big objects matter because it will become possible to approach an appreciable percentage of light speed.

It is very reasonable to then presume that an intelligently operated 3I ATLAS crossed interstellar space at a velocity even over 80% of light speed.  Thus if the WOW signal from 48 years ago is related, then they traveled here from around thirty light years away and likely experienced a much smaller time pertiod as wrll from relatavistic distortion.

Understand that Cloud Cosmology proposes our experienced physical world is build from electron nucleous atomics which provide a natural wave guide for DARK MATTER media and our spirit bodies as well.. high frequency can shift this DARK MATTER our of our wave guide surround.  This takes almost all gravity with it.  By the way, so called paranormal observations conform nicely to this scenario as well as those abduction reports from ETs.

Understand that DARK MATTER is likely neutron pairs with no electons and unable to react with either an electron or proton.  Thus a high packing around and within any atom is practical.  Actual decay produces a hydrogen atom, but this is rare enough except for the sun and plausibly all planets.  Just not much..


The adjustments displayed so far are modest, but if this object is going to stay in our solar bsystem then it will need more shifts.  It may well swing far out into space and then return multiple times adjusting somewhat each time.  do not assume fine control or handy rockets for this.


How CDC and FDA Defrauded the American Public about Serious Vaccine Harms



Look at that image above. Millions died or were at least casulties from the JAb and folks like myself knew from day one.   And it all ran under cover of the common cold which is corona virus.

There may have been a succesful vaccine in the use of cowpox, but that was also biologically unique and impossible to replicate.

so much else is deeply suspect,not least the misappropriation of stats over sanitation expansion and yes, education.  folks today all know better.


How CDC and FDA Defrauded the American Public about Serious Vaccine Harms

https://www.activistpost.com/how-cdc-and-fda-defrauded-the-american-public-about-serious-vaccine-harms/

In a fascinating book released in September,Vaccines, Amen: The Religion of Vaccines,1 lawyer Aaron Siri explains how the American public was systematically misled by the very institutions they are supposed to trust.

Via numerous lawsuits, Aaron brought many deeply buried, politically inconvenient facts to light, and he is very factual, which is uncommon for vaccine books. They are usually emotional and far too critical of vaccines, or far too positive, with little in-between, which is where the truth is.

The value of lawyers cannot be overestimated. Nothing hurts like the truth about healthcare,2 which is why we badly need lawyers to dig it out. When drug policy researcher Alan Cassels reviewed my 2025 book, How Merck and Drug Regulators Hid Serious Harms of the HPV Vaccines,3 he concluded that “If you want the real truth about drugs, don’t ask doctors – ask lawyers.”4




Another quote on my book cover is from Martin Kulldorff, the current chair of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): “Drugs and vaccines can heal and save lives, but also harm. That puts our lives in the hands of pharmaceutical companies. Can we trust them? In this well-documented book, the clear answer is: NO.”

It is essential to understand this. We know very little about the harms of vaccines because most of the data come from substandard and flawed trials performed by drug companies, which leave out important adverse events from their publications3,5,6 and avoid, with virtually no exceptions, to compare their vaccines with a placebo.

As an expert witness in a lawsuit against Merck, I read 112,452 pages of confidential study reports and uncovered multiple instances of scientific misconduct in which the drug agencies were complicit. It turned out that Gardasil, an HPV vaccine, causes serious and persistent neurological harms, which drug regulators have denied.

Aaron explains right from the start why vaccines are sacrosanct. People never say they believe in cars but many say they believe in vaccines, without having the data needed to provide an informed opinion. I found the same when I analysed BMJ articles about Kennedy’s much-needed vaccine reforms; it was all about faith, not about science.2

Aaron has used lawsuits to demonstrate that vaccinologists have a self-reinforcing belief system whose dogmas do not stand up to scrutiny in court. His takedown of Stanley Plotkin, the “high priest” of vaccines, during a deposition is a masterpiece in exposing that the emperor has no clothes when claiming that childhood vaccines are safe and have been carefully tested.

Plotkin was unable to understand why his earnings of hundreds of millions of dollars from royalties and his close alignment with the interests of the industry could influence his views on vaccines. He didn’t know that safety monitoring in certain trials only lasted 4-5 days after vaccination, which is way too short to capture autoimmune adverse events. Worst of all, Plotkin stated that certain vaccines don’t cause certain harms, or he stated that they were rare, without having any evidence in support of his wishful thinking.

In 1986, manufacturers were granted almost complete immunity from liability for injuries caused by vaccines. This meant they had no incentive to ensure that vaccines are safe before they brought them onto the market. People can file claims against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which is therefore not interested in having any of its agencies, including the CDC and the Food and Drug Agency (FDA), publish studies demonstrating vaccine harms – a perfect set-up for the industry.

HHS was required to submit to Congress biennial vaccine safety reports but a lawsuit revealed that it had not sent a single report in 30 years.

HHS was also required to make recommendations to improve vaccine safety, but after a single report decades ago, the only thing it did was disband the task force that was responsible for this. Aaron’s group also found out, after having complained in court about redactions in emails, that the CDC had a cozy relationship with Big Pharma and made policies about vaccine safety with the companies while refusing to work with citizen groups concerned about safety.

Vaccines have saved millions of lives. Smallpox is estimated to have killed around 500 million people in the last 100 years of its existence and the vaccine eradicated the disease.5 However, vaccine zealots claim that also currently, vaccines save millions of lives in the Western world, which is not true. 

Aaron shows that there was a huge decline in infectious disease mortality between 1900 and the introduction of modern vaccines, which started with the diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) vaccine in 1949. 

In the year before the introduction of each of 12 childhood vaccines, only about 5,000 people in total died from these diseases in the United States, which means that the combined life-saving effect must have been very small.

The DTP Vaccine

The DTP vaccine is the most used vaccine in the world, but Peter Aaby and other Danish researchers found in several studies that the vaccine increased total mortality in Guinea-Bissau. When Aaron asked UNICEF if they had evidence that the opposite was true, they referred to an inconclusive 2014 WHO report. Astoundingly, they did not comment on Aaby’s 2017 study, which was performed to address concerns WHO raised in 2014 about his previous studies.

In 2019, Aaron asked me to review the research, which was revealing.5,7 Aaby found that the DTP vaccine doubled mortality even though all the biases he documented in his observational study favoured the vaccinated group. He also found that all studies that had analysed existing data sets collected for other purposes suffered from substantial biases that led to an underestimation of the harms.

I consider Aaby’s findings much more convincing than the WHO report, which had major issues. The authors were not allowed to meta-analyse the studies, likely because the WHO didn’t want to run a risk of receiving a systematic review that suggested that the DTP vaccine increases total mortality. Moreover, the way WHO’s experts handled the data was inconsistent and scientifically inappropriate.

Even though two of the three authors of the WHO report were senior researchers in the Cochrane Collaboration, editor-in-chief Karla Soares-Weiser and statistician Julian Higgins, editor of the 636-page Cochrane Handbook, which describes how to do reliable systematic reviews, they used vote-counting (how many studies are for and how many against?), which is a method recommended against in the Cochrane Handbook. It was truly bizarre.

Aaby published another study in 2018 that I also commented upon and which also showed an increase in mortality. Yet again, UNICEF didn’t do anything but emails exchanged with the CDC revealed that both agencies were concerned about avoiding personal exposure and not about whether a vaccine might kill children. The metric of success in the vaccine field is not survival or childhood health but vaccine uptake.

Supporting the False Narrative by Deception and Lies

Aaron provides other examples to demonstrate that our institutions are more focused on supporting the official, false narratives than on providing honest information. When studies show that vaccines increase deaths, they are by default deemed unreliable, but when the same kind of studies show that vaccines reduce deaths, they are reliable. During Covid-19, reductions in mortality were ascribed to vaccines, but when mortality increased despite continued vaccinations, the authorities pulled the data from public view. This also happened when it turned out that the more doses people received, the greater the risk of Covid infection.

Drug companies and authorities lied repeatedly by claiming that certain vaccines, e.g., against Covid, can prevent transmission. GlaxoSmithKline even tried to sell more vaccines by encouraging old people to get vaccinated against whooping cough to protect their grandchildren, but the pertussis vaccine does not prevent infection or transmission. Aaron’s firm successfully sued GSK for its false advertising.

That most childhood vaccines fail to prevent transmission makes it particularly repulsive to mandate those vaccines as a condition for school entry, but all US states mandate vaccines for school enrollment. Even the HPV vaccine has been mandated in the US, although the disease is sexually transmitted, which hopefully does not occur in the classroom. Aaron argues that the more a product needs to be coerced, the more one should be concerned about that product.

In the US, newborns get vaccinated against hepatitis B on the first day of life, even though this disease is typically transmitted by sex or drug users sharing needles. The vaccine was approved by the FDA based on a study of 147 children monitored for 5 days after vaccination, and with no control group.

When Aaron sent a legal demand to HHS about why clinical trials for childhood vaccines did not include a placebo control group, the agency lied: “Many pediatric vaccines have been investigated in clinical trials that included a placebo.” Not a single childhood vaccine on CDC’s routine schedule has been studied in placebo-controlled trials before licensure, but in a public dispute with Aaron, Plotkin’s best-known disciple, Paul Offit, claimed that all vaccines are tested in such trials before licensure. He even argued that it would be cruel to use a placebo control, so, if we accept his explanations, they mean that he, Plotkin, and their colleagues are cruel.

As Aaron soberly explains, in a placebo-controlled trial, children are left unvaccinated only for the duration of the trial. In contrast, injecting a vaccine into millions of children in an uncontrolled setting without first assessing its safety in a placebo-controlled trial is, to any objective, reasonable observer, grossly unethical conduct. Childhood vaccines are used in healthy children to benefit very few. The requirements for vaccines should therefore be much greater than for other drugs, but there are virtually none. This may be the most appalling neglect we have in all of healthcare.

Offit falsely claimed that 16 children had died in a polio trial on “placebo” as he called it but it was not placebo and the true number was 4.

Aaron documents that new vaccines for the same disease are compared with older vaccines, and when the adverse events are the same, it is concluded that both are safe. This is like saying that cigars are safe because they cause similar harms as cigarettes. He dryly remarks that “This is not something I would have ever thought to dream up,” and he holds so-called fact-checkers to the fire. They believe that the claim that routine childhood vaccines were not licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial is false but have not bothered to look up the facts in primary sources such as publicly available FDA documents.

A CNN article from June 2025 is particularly “amusing.” It listed 258 studies at the time (it now lists over 1,000) and Dr. Jake Scott from Stanford University claimed that 153 tested vaccines against placebos. But, as Secretary Kennedy made clear in his response, not one of these studies included a placebo or was otherwise relied upon by the FDA to license a vaccine on the CDC’s routine childhood schedule.

Moderna abandoned development of its RSV vaccines after placebo-controlled trials had shown more serious respiratory infections in the vaccine groups.8 There had been problems before. An RSV vaccine trial in the 1960s infamously sent 80% of vaccinated children to the hospital and two died. Apparently, the vaccine primed their immune system so that during an infection, helpful T cell responses were blunted and high levels of ineffective antibodies were produced, forming dangerous airway-clogging complexes.

The dengue vaccine, used in the tropics, is another example of why we cannot assume vaccines are safe.5 It worked well for children who had already been infected, but in other children, it increased the risk of severe disease, which can be fatal. This was only revealed because the trial was placebo-controlled and because safety was monitored for five years.

Aaron describes how virtually all serious adverse events in vaccine trials with no placebo control are dismissed by researchers on drug company payrolls as being unrelated to the vaccine, which they cannot know, as they don’t know which harms a new vaccine might cause. This type of deception was common in Merck’s Gardasil trials.3

Aaron quotes a letter that references some research that links vaccines to autism, which I have reservations about that I shall not discuss here, as this issue requires rigorous reviews of the research. But I have dismissed the popular idea in anti-vaccine circles that the CDC did anything wrong in the study where they did not find any association with the MMR vaccine; I have explained why Andrew Wakefield’s retracted study in the Lancet was fraudulent, on many counts;5 and I have published critical comments on one of the autism studies.9,10

Obviously, it is important to do high-quality research on this issue. Even though much of the increase in autism diagnoses is artificial, caused by lowering the bar for making a diagnosis and by increased attention, it is also a fact that cases of profound autism have increased.11

It cannot be disputed that vaccines can cause serious, sometimes deadly, harms,1,3,5,8,12 which was confirmed in reports from the Institute of Medicine.1 However, our institutions have failed us badly, and a systematic review from 2014 by the Agency for Health Research and Quality is a good example of this.13

The review was supposedly about vaccine safety but the real goal was to increase vaccine uptake: “increasing vaccination rates remains critically important,” which is a wrong premise for studying vaccine harms. Moreover, the authors stated that new vaccines must undergo rigorous processes before receiving approval and that they meet “stringent criteria for safety,” which is so wrong that it looks like a propaganda pamphlet from a drug company.

Aaron explains how flawed this colossal review is (740 pages). Virtually all the included studies were conducted by drug companies or by people funded by them, and the agency’s claim that they had an unvaccinated control group was wrong, as people also got vaccines in the control group.
More Dirty Tricks by the CDC and the FDA

In 2013, HHS commissioned the Institute of Medicine to review the safety of the CDC childhood schedule including the occurrence of asthma, autoimmune diseases, autism, and other neurodevelopmental disorders. The institute could not find a single study that had compared health outcomes in vaccinated children with those in children who had not received any vaccines. They revealed their bias in the conclusion, which is very odd: “There is no evidence that the schedule is not safe.” I see. So, if the brakes in a new car model have never been tested, the reassuring conclusion would be: “There is no evidence that the brakes don’t work.”

The institute asserted that it is possible to compare vaccinated with unvaccinated children by using databases such as the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) established by the CDC.

It would have been easy for the CDC to do such a study but they never did, or at least never published it, if they did one but didn’t like the results. Instead, they produced a 64-page report about how such a study should be done.

When scientists using the VSD found that vaccines cause various harms, the CDC moved the database to a health industry trade association to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests and to assure that studies it approves confirm that vaccines are safe.

It would be easy to deidentify personal data and make the database publicly available but, as Aaron says, “that is not how the religion of vaccines works.”

It is very burdensome to report adverse events to the available database (VAERS) and fewer than 1% are reported. When Harvard researchers developed a system for automatic reporting, which would also provide a denominator – the number of people vaccinated – the CDC killed the project although a CDC sister agency had funded it, and the CDC refused to communicate with the researchers.

When the CDC did an analysis that revealed massive safety signals for the Covid-19 vaccines, as compared with other vaccines (using proportional reporting ratios), they lied about it. Aaron’s firm asked for the data, but the CDC claimed they had not done the analysis they had planned to do. It was only after pressure from Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) that the CDC admitted that they had the data.

Aaron’s firm sued the CDC to get the data, which showed that the CDC’s own threshold for triggering a safety signal was blown away for numerous serious adverse events, including cardiac events, multisystem inflammatory syndrome, and deaths.

Let me explain, plain and simple: The CDC defrauded the American public. And when they launched a smartphone-based tool, V-safe, that the public could use for reporting adverse effects of the Covid vaccines, they also deceived people to an unbelievable extent. There were 10 listed symptoms that occurred within the first week after vaccination, which were those that normally occur with vaccines. The CDC omitted to include known or suspected harms of the Covid vaccines in the checklist, including myocarditis and stroke, which, in my view, is scientific misconduct.

The public could report health impact data weekly for the first 6 weeks, and after 3, 6, and 12 months. The CDC published over 40 studies based on V-safe but in all of them, health impact data were only those reported in the first week after vaccination. This is also fraud. The CDC furthermore claimed that free-text data should not be released because they contained protected personal information. This is an invalid argument, as data can be pseudonymised.

After over two years of legal demands and federal litigation, Aaron got hold of the missing data. They showed that 8% of V-safe users needed medical care after vaccination, on average 2-3 times, and 75% were urgent care, emergency room, or hospitalisation. An additional 25% reported missing school or work or being unable to do normal activities.

We cannot even trust the randomised trials, as they also grossly underestimate vaccine harms.3,5,6 When my wife got the AstraZeneca Covid vaccine, she became terribly ill, with insomnia, fever, severe headache, muscle aches, nausea, dizziness, and loss of appetite.6 She needed to stay home from work for four days. On day three, she was slow-cerebrated in a way we had never experienced before. The first 13 colleagues at her hospital department (she is professor of clinical microbiology) also became so ill from the vaccine that they needed sick leave. By definition, when you can’t work, it is a severe adverse effect. So, 100% in her department had a severe adverse effect caused by the vaccine, but in AstraZeneca’s trial report in the Lancet, only 1% had a severe adverse reaction.14

I had never seen such a large discrepancy before between what a company publishes and what people experience. By far most of the subsequently vaccinated 35 people at her department also became so ill that they needed a sick leave.

The FDA also defrauds the American public. When Aaron tried to get data on Covid vaccine harms from the FDA (empirical Bayesian data), the agency refused to provide them, claiming resource constraints. His federal lawsuit has so far lasted almost three years “with no end in sight as the FDA is fighting like hell to keep that data hidden.”

The FDA is so corrupt15,16 that I call it Fatal Drug Approvals. If the FDA protected the citizens instead of the drug industry, our prescription drugs would not be the leading cause of death, ahead of heart disease and cancer.17

I also call the FDA the Foot Dragging Agency. When a group of scientists asked the FDA in 2021 to provide the data submitted by Pfizer for its Covid vaccine, the FDA wanted court approval to have more than 75 years to publicly disclose this information at a pace of 500 pages a month.18,19 Aaron sued the FDA and a judge ordered release of the documents.

Even after being ordered to produce everything by a federal court, the FDA had withheld records directly tied to its emergency use authorisation of Pfizer’s vaccine, estimated to be approximately one million pages.19 Aaron noted that “Only those concerned about the truth seek to conceal evidence.”
The Henry Ford Study

Filmmaker Del Bigtree established the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN), which through donations has enabled Aaron to launch multiple lawsuits about transparency and rights related to vaccines. Bigtree convinced Dr. Marcus Zervos that he should do the study that the CDC never did, comparing vaccinated with unvaccinated children. Zervos works at Henry Ford Health which had the data needed for such a study readily available.

The stated goal of the study was to rule out vaccines as the cause of long-term adverse health outcomes to reassure parents of the overall safety of vaccinations. When Aaron requested the study to be published no matter what the results showed, Zervos “looked us right in the eyes and assured us that he was a man of integrity and would publish the results, whatever the finding.”

Aaron received a study report in early 2020. The results were similar to those in other studies that had an unvaccinated control group. When he asked Zervos’ coauthor, Lois Lamerato, why they had not submitted it for publication, she replied that the higher-ups at Henry Ford did not want it to be published.

Both authors thought their study was well done, but Zervos explained to Bigtree – which he filmed with a hidden camera for his excellent documentary, An Inconvenient Study,20 that he didn’t want to lose his job.

After Aaron had published his book, the Henry Ford study report came to light on 9 September 2025 during a Senate hearing on “The Corruption of Science.”22 I explained23 that a ground rule in evidence-based medicine is that we should use the best available evidence when we make decisions, and as the Henry Ford study is the only one that compared unvaccinated with vaccinated kids for development of chronic diseases and that took account of confounders, it is very important that we examine this study carefully for its validity.

I did that,23 which I shall not repeat here, and there are also helpful replies to criticisms of the study on the homepage for the documentary film.20 The bottom line is that the study is above-average quality. The authors were genuinely surprised by their results and did sensitivity analyses to test their robustness. They also provided a very interesting discussion about issues that might explain their findings, which they put in context. This is what we call good science.

The vaccinated children had 2.5 times the rate of “any chronic disease,” compared to unvaccinated children. The risk was four times higher for asthma, three times higher for atopic conditions like eczema and hay fever, and five to six times higher for autoimmune and neurodevelopmental disorders. This is expected for vaccine harms. The researchers wrote that childhood infections appear to provide significant protection from atopy.

I wrote twice to Zervos and Lamerato noting that I have other data that support their findings and urging them to come out in the open and become part of history. They did not respond. They prefer to protect themselves rather than millions of children who are harmed by vaccines. I have no sympathy for such cowardly behaviour and noted in my article23 that they have a moral obligation to release their data in a pseudonymised fashion on a secure platform to allow other researchers to work with them for the common good.
Conclusions

Aaron warns that “history will not look kindly upon the misguided officials and individuals who seek to expel children from school, fire people from jobs, and otherwise punish people for refusing a medical product.” On top of this, the products have not been adequately tested for safety! This is like driving a car without knowing if the brakes are okay.

Aaron also notes that when they cannot persuade on the merits, tyrants engage in coercion, censorship, mandates, and punishment, which dehumanise people. Sadly, I will need to agree that this is where America, and to a much lesser extent, Europe, is today in relation to vaccines.

This must change radically. We therefore need to support Kennedy as much as we can, as he is the driver of the reforms we need.
ReferencesSiri A. Vaccines, Amen. The Religion of Vaccines. Injecting Freedom LLC; 2025.
Gøtzsche PC. BMJ’s Coverage of Kennedy’s Vaccine Reforms Amounts to Character Assassination. J Acad Publ Health 2025;Nov 10.
Gøtzsche PC. How Merck and drug regulators hid serious harms of the HPV vaccines. New York: Skyhorse; 2025.
Cassels A. The Dauntless Dane Exposes the Dark Side of HPV Vaccines. Brownstone Journal 2025;Sept 1.
Gøtzsche PC. Vaccines: truth, lies, and controversy. New York: Skyhorse; 2021.
Gøtzsche PC. The Chinese virus: Killed millions and scientific freedom. Copenhagen: Institute for Scientific Freedom; 2022.
Gøtzsche PC. Effect of DTP vaccines on mortality in children in low-income countries. Expert Report 2019;June 19.
Cohen J. ‘Safety signal’ in Moderna’s RSV vaccine studies halts trials of other vaccines for childhood killer. Science 2024;Dec 13.
Gøtzsche PC. Open Peer Review of: Vaccination and neurodevelopmental disorders: a study of nine-year old children enrolled in Medicaid. J Acad Publ Health 2025;Mar 3.
Gøtzsche PC. The authors fail to address my criticism and introduce new errors. J Acad Publ Health 2025;Mar 3.
Hughes MM, Shaw KA, DiRienzo M, et al. The Prevalence and Characteristics of Children With Profound Autism, 15 Sites, United States, 2000-2016. Public Health Rep 2023;138:971-80.
Gøtzsche PC, Demasi M. Serious harms of the COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review. Copenhagen: Institute for Scientific Freedom 2023;March 22.
Maglione MA, Gidengil C, Das L, et al. Safety of Vaccines Used for Routine Immunization in the United States. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US) 2014;Jul. (Evidence Reports/Technology Assessments, No. 215.)
Voysey M, Clemens SAC, Madhi SA, et al. Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK. Lancet 2021;397:99-111.
Brownlee S, Lenzer J. Science For Sale: How Drugmakers Captured The FDA. The Lever 2025;Nov 7.
Gøtzsche PC. Deadly medicines and organised crime: How big pharma has corrupted health care. London: Radcliffe Publishing; 2013.
Gøtzsche PC. Prescription drugs are the leading cause of death. And psychiatric drugs are the third leading cause of death. Brownstone Journal 2024; April 16.
Siri A. Why a Judge Ordered FDA to Release Covid-19 Vaccine Data Pronto. Bloomberg Law 2022;Jan 18.
Demasi M. FDA misled the judiciary about Pfizer’s vaccine documents. Substack 2024;Dec 13.
Bigtree D. An inconvenient study. Documentary film 2025;Oct 12.
Lamerato L, Chatfield A, Tang A, Zervos M. Unpublished manuscript. Impact of Childhood Vaccination on Short and Long-Term Chronic Health Outcomes in Children: A Birth Cohort Study. Henry Ford Health System, Detroit MI.
Demasi M. Inside the Henry Ford vaccine controversy. Substack 2025;Oct 15.
Gøtzsche PC. Is the Extensive US Vaccine Schedule Harmful? Brownstone Journal 2025;Oct 22.

The Art of Memorization


Memory is odd and even misleading in terms of intelligence.  We all memorized the times table so that encountering any given pairing immediately throws up the answer.  Rather useful but not so true.  I know two such pairs fail that test in my personal purview.

Logically all forms of mathematatical calculation and calculation in general has a memory component and a remembered pattern.  you can remember every statement but understand nothing until you understand the pattern.  Is the pattern different from a memory mask?  I do think so.  Yet logic decisions ultimately seem simple enough.


Memory systems need to be taught and practised and then applied. This allows best usage and avoidance of brain exhaustion.

The Art of Memorization

How natural medicine can enhance your capacity to study, retain information and explore the depths of your dreams


Nov 10, 2024

Story at a Glance:

•Academic success is primarily based on one’s ability to memorize material. Unfortunately, the educational system rarely teaches students how to do that.

•Effective learning requires actively rather than passively engaging with the required material and being conscious of what is going on inside your body and mind so that you can determine which approaches are correct for you.

•Many of the same factors that determine overall health and neurological health (e.g., a healthy sleep cycle and adequate circulation throughout the body) also directly influence your capacity to study and memorize.

•In this article, I will review the various approaches and supplements that we have found to be the most helpful in improving memory retention and supporting academic success (along with increasing the lucidity of dreams if taken right before bed).

The primary mechanism our society uses to determine one’s eventual wealth and place in the social hierarchy is their academic performance. As such, many put forward an incredible sustained effort to succeed at each rung of the academic ladder, and in many cases, at the urging of their parents, begin that effort from a very young age. However, while a variety of justifications exist for the society adopting this convention, there are also major issues with it, such as:

•Far too many who go through it and put in a sustained effort to “succeed” end up with nothing to show for it.

•Because education has essentially established a monopoly on moving up the social ladder (which forces everyday citizens to participate in its rat race), it has no incentive to provide quality education to those it trains—particularly since unconditional federal support (e.g., student loans) subsidizes education and is allotted based on how many students attend each institution, not the quality of the education offered.

•Education primarily focuses on telling you what to do, not how to do it. As a result, those with inherent talent do much better than their peers, whereas many of those who simply try to do what they are told to do fall short regardless of how much effort they put in.

•By making people believe they need to be “taught to learn” through copying what the teacher does rather than encouraging the natural learning capacity of each student to emerge, the educational process makes students lose their inherent ability to learn or think critically.

Note: a recent study found that throughout history, whenever there are periods of internal conflict, states have introduced education reform that is designed to indoctrinate citizens to accept the status quo.

As such, the primary function of schooling has become more and more dependent on conditions of subservience and conformity rather than creating a generation of creative critical thinkers who can solve the issues our country faces and innovate solutions that advance us into the future. This in turn, is both highly unfair to those who are put through the academic grinder (but not inherently suited for success within it) and an immense waste of national resources. For example, as the years go by, we keep spending more money on research and education:




Yet primary educational outcomes (e.g., literacy) keep worsening, and valuable scientific innovations keep becoming rarer:



Note: I believe one of the most significant issues with the profit-focused debasement of American education is that it’s lowered the quality of the graduates who can fill our society’s institutions, thus lowering the quality of those institutions.





Studying


The primary metric determining success in education is how effectively one can memorize testable material. As such, a lot of education is compelling students to “spend more time studying” and dole out a myriad of punishments for those students who did not study enough. This in turn, touches upon one of my favorite phrases:


Work smart, not harder.

In my case, I believe much of my academic success boiled down to three things:

•In junior high, while learning a foreign language, I accidentally figured out how to use the sleep cycle to quickly memorize a lot of information.

•Because I recognized the value of natural health at a very young age, I avoided most of the things within our society which impair the sleep cycle or cognitive function.

•Because of the previous two things, there was less pressure on me to always be studying. As a result, I had a lot more time available to think about what I was studying and look into related sources of information.

This final point is particularly important as it cuts to the heart of the problem.

Students are constantly put under an immense amount of pressure to learn a lot of material, and to address this immense task, everything else gets cut out, so more time can go into memorizing the material that is taught. However, by doing this, their learning becomes much less efficient, so even though more time is spent studying, much less is learned.

Understanding vs. Memorizing


In most cases, the best way to memorize a topic is to both understand it and to know the justification for why it was taught to you in the first place. However, in most cases neither (especially the latter) happens. For example, when interviewing medical students, colleagues and I have found it fairly rare for the interviewee to answer why they were taught a specific piece of information (even within the area of focus they highlighted in their personal statement).

Typically, people recall information by having it connect to something else they know. As such, when you study a subject, but also take the time to explore it and make sense of each thing that is connected to it, those mental connections form, and the knowledge transforms from something you can hopefully recall to something that you just know (or can quickly recall by thinking about a connected subject you have a deep grasp of).

Likewise, understanding the value of learning something both fosters those critical connections but simultaneously allows the information to become something much more real you can directly take ownership of rather than an abstract fact you struggle to pull back to you (which again makes it far easier to recall).


When a light is turned on with a switch, most people don’t want to understand everything that allows that to happen; they just want to know that turning a switch turns the light on.

This lack of conceptual understanding is particularly common in medical education, where students are bombarded with a firehose of information they are expected to somehow memorize. As a result, there’s very little time for anything else (e.g., understanding the basis for it). Worse still, the hierarchal nature of medical education actively disincentivizes doing anything besides trusting the information being taught (as questioning any medical dogma can lead to harsh sanctions for the student).

I’ve long suspected this is by design as it both prevents students from ever exploring contradictory information and simultaneously creates an immense psychological investment in the value of their education, which makes them quite reluctant to question if parts of it are wrong. In my eyes, both of these are essential for the indoctrination physicians undergo, as many of the things they are taught don’t actually make sense if you really think about them—hence motivating and ensuring there is never enough time to question the medical curriculum.

Likewise, even if a student is skeptical about what’s being taught, being conscious of it often requires them to simultaneously hold two separate world views within their mind, as graduating from medical training requires each doctor to effectively present the orthodox version of medicine. Since that’s already an immense task, it’s often simply not possible to also hold any other worldview in one’s mind.

Note: I know people who had extensive backgrounds in natural medicine (and a great deal of clinical success with it) who then went to medical school and completely abandoned those disciplines because it was not possible for them to also have enough space in their minds to hold both perspectives simultaneously.

Active and Passive Memorization


When I was in medical school, to make studying more “fun” I did the following:

1. I would often procrastinate studying the tested material by instead learning about an interesting related topic (e.g., a correlate within natural medicine).

2. I would often look for holes or fallacies in what was being taught to us.

3. For each exam, I would try to study in a different way from how I had previously and see how the results compared to each previous attempt.

The value of the first two approaches should make sense (e.g. because they fostered more connections to the memorized material and preserved my love of learning—rather than viewing the course work I faced as something to be afraid of). However, of these, I learned the most from the third approach.

Originally, my desire to try to study differently each time arose because I knew that each subsequent examination would be more challenging than the previous (as the coursework in medical school ramps up). However, before long, I realized it was quite interesting to observe how I learned and continually experiment with it (making the studying process more fun to go through), and as time went on, I gained many insights about the process for both myself and others. These included:

•Many aspects of your environment (e.g., the lighting or how coherent or incoherent the music you listen to is) can significantly impact your ability to process and retain information.

•Different people learn differently, so there is no one size fits all approach. For example, some people are visually oriented, some are primarily auditory, and some are kinesthetic. Each group typically learns best through that specific channel (e.g., listening to numerous lectures versus looking at the material and then drawing it out, etc.).

•Similarly, many different study aids exist that work only for some people but not others (e.g., many of my classmates prioritized using flashcards, but I never found them helpful for me). Unfortunately, people tend to assert what works for them is also the best for everyone else, and one of the most common mistakes I see students make is being compelled by their peers to utilize a studying approach which is not actually the best for them.

Note: one of the unfortunate changes I’ve witnessed in medical students over the last decades is an increasing reliance on external study tools (e.g., online videos or demanding precise study guides and practice questions from their teachers) rather than students creating their own study materials from the presented material. Since active learning is critical for long term retention, I believe this passivity with learning is highly counterproductive.

•While studying, if you make an effort to stay consciously aware of what is occurring inside you, you are much more likely to develop your effective learning method. Essentially, when you learn a concept, you can either be disconnected from it or acutely aware of what aspects of it you are unclear of and struggle to recall. At this point, you can actively focus on addressing those weak links in your understanding and recall of the concept (e.g., I found that I would sometimes have difficulty consistently remembering which thing something paired with, so I actively created my own mnemonics for topics where I saw those recall issues arose).

Note: there is an immense amount of complexity to this point (which gradually reveals itself as you pay more and more attention to how your mind integrates information).

•Similarly, being cognizant of what is going on in your body is extremely important. For example, many find that if they maintain some sort of connection to their body as they study (e.g., through a relaxed breathing exercise), their cognitive stamina and ability to retain information increases.

•Likewise, if your brain or your nervous system becomes overloaded, you will retain significantly more if you take a break (e.g., move around, exercise, do yoga, or take a nap) than you will if you just keep studying. Sadly, many students when they are overloaded, instead use medications like Adderal to keep going, which beyond being harmful to the brain, are less effective than simply giving the brain the breaks it needs.

Note: we have come to believe one of the reasons doctors are so resistant to learning new information is because the medical education system overloads their nervous system and hence impairs their capacity to learn new information. As such, I found that those who are the most open minded to new ideas, were typically those who found a way to avoid that cognitive burnout during their medical training.

•What you eat can significantly affect your ability to have a clear mind and study in an effective manner. In turn, a constant source of frustration for me has been finding medical students will typically eat lots of junk food while cramming for an exam, as this makes their studying process far less efficient. Likewise, healthy eating makes students much more able to effectively recall information when they are being tested on it for exams. As a learner, it is extremely important to assess if the foods you eat make your cognition clearer or if they dampen it (which sadly is the case for many of the addictive processed foods).

Note: inflammatory diets have been associated with cognitive decline and dementia, while anti-inflammatory diets have been show to prevent it.

•The specific position you study in can make a significant impact on how you learn. For instance, the default position most people study in is sitting up. Still, beyond putting significant strain on the body, it can gradually tighten the muscles in the neck, creating both headaches and fluid congestion from the brain (which often sneak up on a student as they aren’t cognizant of their body and hence do not pick up on the early signs of strain before they turn into something more severe that prevents studying). While opinions vary (as everyone is different), I believe the two best positions to study in are either squatting, or standing (especially if you can do so at a treadmill desk).

The key theme behind each of these points is that if you make the effort to actively engage in the studying process (rather than just passively trying to absorb the information being fed to you) and really question exactly what works and what does not work for you, you will be able to retain much more when you study (and have it be a much more enjoyable process).

Additionally, if you can figure out how to do this early in your academic career, it will pay dividends for a long time. For example, in addition to getting better grades, you will often be able to remember the information far into the future, whereas in contrast, I noticed many of my peers (who studied to pass tests rather than to create long term information retention) no longer recall many of the basic science concepts we learned at the start of medical school.

Note: many of the rules here also apply to general health, as since the guidelines we are fed are often so corrupt they cannot be trusted, obtaining health instead requires you to be conscious of what is going on within your own body and to then continually evaluate how each input you are exposed to improves or worsens it.

Fluid Circulation


In this publication, I have made the case that impaired circulation is a root cause of chronic illness (e.g., one of the most common mechanisms of harm from vaccines is that they cause microstrokes which are easily detectable with the appropriate neurological examination). While the harm from poor circulation can be overt (e.g., significant swelling and skin changes in the legs), typically it is subtle and goes unrecognized.

For example, a significant contributor to dementia is poor blood flow to the brain and poor lymphatic drainage from the brain—best demonstrated by how frequently the COVID-19 vaccines cause cognitive impairment or accelerated dementia. In turn, we’ve found some of the most effective treatments for cognitive impairment or dementia are simply to safeguard the brain’s blood flow (e.g., by restoring the physiologic zeta potential).

Similarly, impaired fluid circulation is extremely detrimental to mental health (e.g., one survey found the COVID vaccines caused 26.4% of recipients with a pre-existing anxiety or depression disorder to experience an exacerbation of the disorder). Likewise, physical activity (one of the most effective ways to move fluids within the body) has also been shown to be 50% more effective than medications or cognitive behavioral therapy for reducing mild-to-moderate symptoms of depression, psychological stress, and anxiety.

Note: fluid congestion in the head is often accompanied by cloudy thinking or an inability to continuously stay focused.

Because of this, being able to be aware of when fluid congestion is happening (particularly in the head) and then doing something to address that stagnation (e.g., taking a break, moving around, changing your studying position, exercising, taking a hot bath) is immensely helpful for supporting learning (and avoiding burnout).

Note: DMSO is quite helpful for improving fluid circulation in the brain, and research has shown that it counteracts both the adverse effects of strokes and prevents cognitive decline (discussed here). While we typically use intravenous DMSO to protect cognitive function later in life, it can also be very helpful after periods of prolonged mental exertion (e.g., for medical students or after you have to spend too much time writing) as it both restores depleted cognitive function and prevents long term cognitive impairment that can result from overstraining the central nervous system.

Sleep


Many studies (which I compiled here) have shown that sleep is critically important for both brain health and the long term retention of memory. This should make sense as we’ve all had days of waking up with insufficient sleep, and our minds were much less clear.

Sadly despite sleep being critically important for learning (and many other critical things like preventing dementia), very little focus is given to it in the educational process. As a result, few students know that drinking alcohol (or taking a sleeping pill) is highly disruptive to restorative sleep, and as a result, students across America, to relax from the stress of studying academically impair themselves by engaging in those activities. Likewise, basic practices of sleep hygiene (e.g., getting to bed at a regular hour, avoiding coffee later in the day, or not being exposed to blue light from screens at night) are almost never mentioned to them.

Disregarding the importance of sleep is particularly tragic for doctors in training, as during their medical residencies, they are often forced to work 24-30 hour shifts, under the belief they “need more time to be trained sufficiently” despite the fact sleep deprivation impairs learning and significantly increases (sometimes fatal) medical errors.

Note: a more detailed summary of the critical importance of restorative sleep and the simple approaches that can be taken to improve it can be found here.



Whole Body Health


One of the major issues with how medicine is practiced today is that each issue is seen as an isolated problem which requires its own pill to treat, when in reality, many ailments are simply different manifestations of how the same underlying issue expresses itself wherever the patient is the most susceptible (e.g., consider how many different side effects have been seen from the COVID vaccines or that those side effects frequently arise at sites of pre-existing weaknesses in that individual).

Likewise, many of the same degenerative processes we see at the end of life simply represent the same underlying diseases (e.g., fluid congestion) in the body worsening with age. For instance, as I’ve tried to show here, beyond a clear mind being valuable for memorization and academic success, the habits that create it are also what stave off cognitive impairment, and eventually dementia—conditions which despite decades of research (that trillions have been spent on) conventional medicine still cannot offer a solution to.

Similarly, the core degenerative processes we face can often collectively compound into the critical illnesses our society still struggles with. For example, many psychiatric illnesses (which under our paradigm can only be “treated” with perpetual psychiatric medication) result from neurological damage, and as such, can often be addressed by addressing the degenerative processes that create neurologic damage.

For example, as I showed here, the same degenerative processes (e.g., poor sleep or poor circulation) can cause similar psychiatric issues, and likewise, the same treatments that improve either also improve mental health (e.g., previously I showed how DMSO and how ultraviolet blood irradiation both improve circulation, decrease inflammation, and improve a variety of psychiatric illnesses).

Note: all of this is also quite important to academic success, as frequently the most significant challenge students face is mental fogginess or anxiety while taking tests—but sadly few options are presented for them besides anti-anxiety medications to take at those times.

It is my sincere hope this information was able to provide a few useful tools for studying and highlight just how interconnected many aspects of wellness are.

In the final part of this article, I will discuss a few of the specific strategies, supplements, and foods we found were the most helpful for us retaining information and effectively performing on tests throughout our academic careers—including one approach that has the remarkable side effect of creating lucid dreams.

Can the COVID Scamsters Stick the Landing?




We truly are not sure of what the end game is supposed to be. Several have been put about and one may even be true.  A natural consequence of our global trade war is to rapidly fuel the emergence of a Canada led Global TRADE CONFEDERATION driving global cultural convergence and possibly the emergence of the RULE of TWELVE.

Was this the plan all along?  I ask that because until TRUMP announced his trade war, nothing he ever did was Blind Dumb or Stupid.  Suddenly we had this.  He unavoidably  attended courses in economics in college and knows what any student knows.

The future looks exciting and Trump could exit anytime as well, but his job is done if that was the real plan. Can the world shift ito a Confederation of Canadian Proto Provinces facilitating bilateral trade?.


Can the COVID Scamsters Stick the Landing?

by Corbett | Nov 30, 2025 | 

https://corbettreport.com/can-the-covid-scamsters-stick-the-landing/

It’s one thing for the WHO mafia to execute one of the most brazen psychological operations of all time. Successfully convincing billions of people to lock themselves in their own homes and roll up their sleeves for injections of genetic slurry all in the name of a ginned-up “health emergency” is no mean feat.

But it’s another thing altogether for those conspirators to follow through on that psyop and actually achieve their desired end goal: the erection of the biosecurity state.

For those of us who managed to maintain our sanity over the last five years, the question is not whether COVID was a psyop—the answer to that question was obvious from the start—but whether the COVID conspirators have accomplished their objectives.

So, where do we stand in 2025? Did the COVID scamsters win?





Not to worry, dear friends. If cosmology has anything to do with our future, the predicted solar ‘kill shot’ that is meant to hit the solar system in the 2040’s (akin to the Carrington Event, only worse) will ensure that nothing that depends on electricity will have any use, once that happens. Our grandchildren will not be worrying about QR codes or a cashless society. They will be worrying about how to heat and feed themselves, without electricity.




Preaching to the choir.

When you lose your job after 32 years working as as respiratory therapist in the busiest COVID unit in Ontario for refusing to take an experimental vaccine, your sister who was a pharmacist dies suddenly after getting long COVID and father dies of turbo cancer IMO they are winning. This vaccine is a bio weapon made by the DoD and distributed by big pharmaceutical. The mRNA aspect is a Dogbone. This injection contains Graphene that acts like nano razors inside the cell. Dr.Noack explained this before he was found dead. Hard to say who wins or loses when your potential audience is dead.





Not a fan of Stew Peters. Here he interviews Francis Boyle about DARPA’s
Involvement.






Excellent summary. Question is, would people fall for another scamdemic? I’d like to think “no” but, given the fact that the vast majority of people still haven’t understood the last one to any degree, who knows?

On the UK Covid inquiry:
Neal Ferguson -> Neil Ferguson.
The UK Covid inquiry has reached its predetermined conclusions after blowing £192 million so far. A pretty impressive waste of public money and a record for a public inquiry.





Question is, would people fall for another scamdemic? I’d like to think “no” but, given the fact that the vast majority of people still haven’t understood the last one to any degree, who knows?


Statistically speaking, we should not have another pandemic of this magnitude for another 100 years or so.

Think Spanish Flu, Covid-19.



But of course you can throw statistics out the window when there are mega bucks and population control at stake.



Thanks for pointing out the Neal > Neil mistake. Corrected.





Good revealing of some of the agendas and plans James for anyone new to your site.
The biggest thing right now is what are any offered SOLUTIONS that don’t contain bloodshed and gunpowder??



I have been doing my best to put out information about these agendas (and solutions) to take over humanity’s natural evolutionary progress and create a digital slave state for years now. My free download pdf of my research on the who, what, why, etc. of the so-called “Pandemic” was put out 4 years years. I put it out here now and then with the idea you have fresh visitors who have never seen it.


LINE IN THE SAND (essay)



The controllers are multifaceted in their approach. Trump is indeed a very dangerous, narcissistic, ego driven person, part of the so-called “swamp” (NWO) and he cleverly lied his way into being elected through the hearts and minds of people so damn tired of all the corruption, only to be worse then anything before.


Then there is

* The 45 Communist Party Goals from 60 years ago (searchable) put into the Congressional Record…
Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963
EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES




* The NWO agenda In their own words:
“The great strength of The Order is in its concealment. Let it never appear in any place in its own name, but always covered by another name and another occupation…”



* The Kalergi Plan

* The UN WILDLANDS PROJECT

* Zbigniew Brzezinski’s Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era (written 50 years ago) “The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values.”

* The Tri-Lateral Plan which calls for a gradual convergence of East and West, ultimately leading toward the goal of one world government. National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept.”

May we all find a way to help stop the madness…





It’s so sad but most American’s will believe and trust their government and their experts. Remember we have been conditioned and taught since we were 5 years old and entered the public school system to always listen and believe authorities.

But some of us outlaws (not to be mistaken as criminals) refused to mindlessly obey if it did not make sense to us. Who would have thought we would end up the lucky ones!!


Thursday, December 4, 2025

3.3-billion-year-old rocks reveal oldest chemical traces of life



We are able to confirm echos of photosynthesis activity back then.  this is long before any form of life came on land.

As with anything from the distant paxt, evidence is maximized at the end of any growth expansion and that growth tail might be as long as anything else.  We cannot often ever know.

At least debate can end.


3.3-billion-year-old rocks reveal oldest chemical traces of life


November 27, 2025


The biomolecular fragments in this photographs are suspected to be the earliest ever signs of photosynthesis, in a rock sample dated 2.5 billion years




Earth's earliest life left behind very few chemical traces. Fragile remains, like ancient cells and microbial mats, were buried, squeezed, heated, and broken apart by the planet's shifting crust before reappearing at the surface. These drastic changes erased most traces of how life began and evolved.


To study Earth's earliest life, paleobiologists mainly depend on fossils. These include tiny remains of single cells and filaments, as well as mineralized traces of microbial mats and layered stromatolites. Such fossils show that life existed at least 3.5 billion years ago, but they are scarce.


Scientists also search for ancient biomolecules in rocks. Some of the hardiest molecules survive up to 1.7 billion years, and isotopes in older rocks suggest life 3.5 billion years ago. But most ancient rocks have lost these clues; heat and pressure shattered those molecules into tiny, uninformative fragments.

But now, using advanced chemistry and AI, a team of Carnegie researchers uncovered new chemical traces of Earth's earliest life in 3.3‑billion‑year‑old rocks, and evidence that oxygen‑producing photosynthesis began over 800 million years earlier than thought.


The study builds on the idea that life selects molecules for specific functions, unlike what we see in meteorites or other non-living chemistry. Living cells make specific molecules in large amounts, each serving a role. The new work shows that even when ancient biomolecules are gone, the pattern of their fragments in old rocks can still reveal clues about past life.

The team analyzed 406 samples with organic molecules using pyrolysis gas chromatography and mass spectrometry. These included 141 ancient sedimentary rocks (from ~3.8 billion to 10 million years old), 65 fossil-rich samples like coal and oil shale, and 123 modern plants, animals, and fungi. They also studied 42 meteorites and 35 lab-made organic mixtures to compare living and non-living sources.

Out of the 406 samples, 272 fit into nine categories used for machine learning: Modern Animals – from recently deceased invertebrates and vertebrates; Modern Plants (non-photosynthetic tissues) – such as roots or flowers; Modern Plants (leaves) – green leaves and other photosynthesizing tissues; Sedimentary Rocks with Fossil Cyanobacteria/Algae, Fossil Wood – including coal; Animal Fossils – including fish and gastropod proteins; Modern Fungi – wood fungi and yeast; Meteorites – mainly chondrites; and Synthetic Samples – 35 lab-made organic mixtures.


The team used advanced spectrometry to isolate chemical fragments from the samples, then applied a "random forest" machine-learning model. This approach builds hundreds of decision trees to classify the data and uncover hidden biological patterns. This marks the first time supervised machine learning has been used to detect biosignatures in rocks billions of years old.

The model distinguished living organic matter from non-living sources with up to 98% accuracy. It identified signs of photosynthesis with 93% accuracy and separated plant-based life from animal-based life with 95% accuracy. Classifying ancient rocks is harder, though, because the training set has few animal fossils.

"These samples and the spectral signatures they produce have been studied for decades, but AI offers a powerful new lens that allows us to extract critical information and better understand their nature," says first author Anirudh Prabhu. "Even when degradation makes it difficult to spot signs of life, our machine learning models can still detect the subtle traces left behind by ancient biological processes."

Instead of just labeling samples as "life" or "non-life," the model gave probability scores. Anything above 60% was considered a strong sign of life. This approach adds nuance – for example, coal heated above 400 °C (752 °F) might lose its biological signals and fall into the "uncertain" range. At the same time, well-preserved ancient samples still scored clearly in the "biotic" zone.

Three major findings emerged from the study. The first was the dating of organic molecules with photosynthetic origins in 2.52‑billion‑year‑old rocks from South Africa. This date is 800 million years earlier than any previously.

The second finding was tracing the biological origins of organic molecules in 3.51‑billion‑year‑old rocks from India. And finally, tracking the non‑photosynthetic origins of organic molecules in 3.5‑billion‑year‑old rocks from South Africa.


Another key result is that supervised machine learning can uncover biochemical clues in Paleoarchean samples, rocks so old and altered that no intact biomolecules remain.

"This study represents a major leap forward in our ability to decode Earth's oldest biological signatures," says Robert Hazen from Carnegie Science. "By pairing powerful chemical analysis with machine learning, we can read molecular 'ghosts' left behind by early life that still whisper their secrets after billions of years. Earth's oldest rocks have stories to tell and we're just beginning to hear them.

"Our results show that ancient life leaves behind more than fossils; it leaves chemical 'echoes.' Using machine learning, we can now reliably interpret these echoes for the first time."