ad-free
Channel / Source:
Sirius Disclosure
Published: 2018-04-05
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqipj3eI2zw
Dr. Greer, welcome back. Thank you. One of the things I wanted to get into, when you look at this adicoma humanoid and you look at the density of the bones, and this is something that's a little medical and technical, but stay with me, everyone's heard of osteoporosis, right? When your bones become thinner, don't have as much calcium in them as they need to have and take
supplements. When you have a womb, fetus in the womb, there's no gravity. It's like it's in one of those floating chambers. The fetus is just floating in fluid. It's called amniotic fluid. There's not a lot of calcium or bone density. When the baby is born having delivered many babies and taking care of trauma in babies, that have been in terrible accidents, their bones are almost like
gum bebear. They're like gum beasts. They're flexible because it's mostly cartilaginous material, as opposed to hard bones that crack and break. Does this make sense? The reason for that is that they haven't been up walking around, bang, bang, bang, moving and there is a developmental phenomenon. One of the things that Dr. Lockman observed in the radiologists in Spain in Barcelona, who were excellent observed, as soon
as the images, just X-ray images came off. We did those before the CAT scan. They said, oh my God, what the hell is this? I remember them gasping because the bone density was that of a normal child. It wasn't of a fetus. In the size six inches, they were assuming this was a fetus. When they looked at the bone density, they said, well, there is absolutely
no way. This is a fetus that was aborted or miscarried. This absolutely was an organism that was up moving around because the other thing is that there are cells called osteoblasts. This is why people get older. If they walk around more, they have stronger bones because osteoblasts are stimulated to lay down more calcium by walking and moving and working out. It's important for people, those of
us getting older to stay active. What people don't understand is that a fetus, the X-rays, if you go to look at fetal X-rays, you can do this on your own. You will see that the bone density of those versus this adicomahemonoid are vastly different. Many radiologists, medical doctors, looking at those, even a radiology tech will go, this is not the X-ray of a deformed fetus. Full
stop. We knew that it wasn't a fetus that was rejected by the time we got the X-rays out of the machine in 2012 in Barcelona. Gary knew it. Dr. Lockman, who was the world's expert on this. Let me explain Dr. Lockman at Stanford literally wrote the textbook on skeletal abnormalities in children. Literally wrote the textbook. Renown globally. He said that it was a six to eight-year-old
child. From not only the bone density, but also the epithetial plates where the bones are growing, there are still plates that are open so it can get bigger and bigger because you're still growing. So, in his comments, which we will post, he states that, well, there are some rare genetic conditions called progeria where your bones age faster. So maybe that's not the real age, but he
says, I seriously doubt it. He says point blank in this particular specimen, he doubts that. He did not know. Did they protect that this was six to eight-years-old though? It's six inches? Yes. This is in his report, word for word. I'm quoting from the report. I held up a moment ago that it was a six-inch specimen that was six to eight-years-old age by both bone density.
Now, the fact that they're saying this was any boarded or miscarried fetus that spontaneously, like when a woman has miscarriages, is laughable. The medical evidence and the world's expert on this and any radiology worth their grain assault, a grain assault would say this is ridiculous, it's junk science. So now we get to the question of how do you go from that to a major medical journal,
like genome research, putting in this kind of misinformation to the public. And one of the things that was pointed out to me in my telephone conversation with this world-renowned geneticist is that he said that when I, he said I want to review the peer review statements. Now, often when you do peer review in a journal, the identities of who reviewed it are kept secret because they
don't want to be attacked for having not accepted your paper. But the statements they make are generally made available so that you can see what people said about it. The senior editor at Genome Research refused to give this renounce geneticist the comments and the review itself, how it was peer reviewed. What are they keeping secret? He knew that there was something very fishy there because apparently
it must have been a junior editor who slipped this into this prestigious journal and now they're running scared at Genome Research Magazine. He also says that someone walking off the street into Stanford maybe could have made these mistakes on the sequencing and the fact that these old DNA is damaged but anyone would have done the controls and not reach these conclusions. He said that they were
obviously cherry picked and at a million of changes in the DNA they picked about 60 to create this predetermined hypothesis. And he said it would be headline news if there was one new genetic syndrome found in the living specimen that they are claiming that there are seven of them is laughable and implausible. I'm quoting the data does not support the conclusions of that paper at all.
So I think that this gets into the question of there's been a breakdown in the peer review process. There's been a breakdown in oversight at Stanford. There's been a breakdown in the people publishing this but also the science writers. If you're a science writer for the New York Times or the Washington Post or CNN you should have asked people is it plausible that this unusual looking
creature that had all this other evidence from Dr. Lockman from the radiologist the CAT scans is actually a fetus that was miscarried. They would if that data were put in front of any competent doctor medical doctor they would have said no this is ridiculous. And if they anyone who would have gone through now granted it took four days for this world renowned geneticist to go through
the data files to see where the errors were made and where the cherry picking happened. And this caused him to conclude that what they did is that they had a foregone conclusion which we know they did because Dr. Nolan made statements to the public in 2012 it's 2013 when the movie Sirius was coming out. It's a deformed fetus. I mean it's a deformed human it's human
in the discussion. And that was reported in Science Magazine and everything. Steven I know I have my viewpoint many of our listeners do why all of this is so hidden why there's an aggressive discrediting campaign against people who are trying to be truth tellers and reveal what's going on like you've done in the ultimate ways. Why would you say this is happening and can we even
undo it? Well for the mainstream public I don't think there's any undoing. I mean we are irreparably damaged here because the scientific journals and the mainstream media have colluded on what is I think one of the largest scientific misinformation campaigns in modern history. I am not exaggerating to say when you have something that could potentially be we don't know. I want to say there's no proof
yet that this is of an extraterrestrial origin. But even if there's a 1% chance it is to have the DNA sequencing be altered to have known science thrown out such as the fact that something laying out in the desert is going to have changes in the DNA sequence that are not naturally occurring mutations on the bones that cause the bones to look like this or the
creature to look like this. But are the result of just normal degradation and decay. This is settled science. This is how do you make these wild, spurious conclusions which are published in a mainstream journal and then covered globally and it's case closed. The case is closed. That's the same with the space weapons issue. I mean people are still you mentioned weapons of mass destruction. People are
still believing that they really were there. Yes. More than the Russians colluded and people are believing what's in the media. Yes. But I hear you I start to get some hope but then I wonder. Well, here's what I think. I think that there's hope only because a large majority of the population doesn't trust the media. A large percentage of the population has begun to question these
authority figures. Now unfortunately we used to have the citadel of truth where our prestigious scientific institutions and what I'm worried about with this. And this is why I'm asking people to contact Stanford University and Genome Research in Cold Spring Harbor which at Cold Spring Harbor is the facility and institution that Watson and Crick founded to where they discovered the DNA molecule and expressed their deep concern
over the possibility that the peer review process broke down that this then made it into the global media and that the conclusions that are in the paper there's a scientist in the LA Times who openly questions the conclusions. He says this is Dr. Matthew Wormen an expert on skeletal genetic disorders at Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard caution that although the researchers identify known and novel genetic
variants they are far from knowing what role they played in otis many abnormalities. It's possible the genetic variants identified in the new research could be responsible for one or more of these events but if he were advising otis bereaved parents or immediate relatives on her genetic condition and told them about the risk I would be very cautious to use any of the data presented in this
paper to draw any conclusions. Now this is one of the renowned this is in the LA Times. Those of you if you can read forgot say read this here's my point I'm trying to rest what we're doing on truth telling and facts fact the world's expert in skeletal abnormality said it's 68 years old fact the radiologists have said that it could not be a fetus because
of the density of the bone material fact Dr. Nolan himself thought it was something extraordinary until two unconfirmed reports of federal agents approached him and he changed his tune 180 degrees fact there were no controls done for this study which this world renowned geneticists has said would have rendered it thrown but if you were just doing your PhD and didn't even have a chair the Harris
chair at Stanford the paper would have rejected with a zero grade he said because there were no controls done on the study and that the conclusions or based on cherry picking sequencing that is almost certainly the result of oxidation and damage to the genetic material and then on top of it to say there were that many major genetic syndromes in one concept it well one fetus
it would he said the bad amount of genetic damage would have resulted in its inability to even divide once as an embryo in other words to go from a single cell zygote into an embryo it couldn't have even divided never mind been miscarried or born so none of this adds up and so the only conclusion you can reach is and he's state stated this to me
it's the level of incompetence of the science scientific data is so great that you have to conclude one of two things either a big trick is being played or there is massive scientific incompetence either way this is a major major story we need to get to the bottom line I am calling as the head of the global disclosure movement and a medical doctor myself and a
scientist I am calling for a major federal and state investigation Stanford University UCSF cold spring harbor and genome research magazine and their peer reviews process and I am asking all other scientists who have the ability to review this paper objectively and the data objectively and to review the paper that was published in 2006 that is settled science about how much DNA degrades and follows part false
apart with this when it's in the environment to to get them involved with this because I do not have a PhD in genetics and the way this is going to rest right now to answer your question is that my opinion is not going to be reported I had the Washington Post and National Geographic magazine both interviewed me about this report and I explained all these problems
to them not a single word of what I said appeared in the media not one word except on your show thank you Carol that you are the only person that has allowed me to explain what our objections are to what could be one of the biggest scientific mishaps in history because we're not dealing with oh well you know they they miss cute something on an unknown
primate this could be a huge story that we were hoping could have broken wide open the possibility that we're not alone in the universe and there are other species of human-like creatures and the fact that there is this Russian that we need help from Russians to get that this specimen that was a big one it was like this large it was a full grown it was
not it was bigger than you would have in even a newborn baby and yet the state examiner in Russia debunked it and said oh it's it was an aborted fetus girl again interesting they're all aborted fetus girls what is this I mean they picked the thing that was said in 96 and what was said in 2018 are the same cover story it makes no sense but
I think the idea of it being an aborted fetus girl came from somebody who knew how the trick was played by these black projects in Russia because remember there are unacknowledged special access projects in the US and Russia that are hand in glove that work together it's global and there are scientists in in Russia that are victims there are politicians who are victims just like there
are the United States and this gets into the whole question of we've got to have disclosure and a full investigation of this corruption not just here in the United States but all over the world this is happening all over the world and it and one of the things that we need to I want to share is an email I got from one of the most senior
CIA people in the history of the UFO subject I do not want to share his name because he's still actively involved behind the scenes assisting us this is one of the reasons I'm still alive I won't go into that anymore than that this is one of the reasons I'm still I have not been successfully assassinated and he wrote to me about this group on December 31st
this to the stars Academy group and his first email was very sweet because he said I hope you have not been negatively impacted by TTSA I anticipate it will dissipate soon that was on December 30th of 2017 and then he said when I wrote back no I'm doing fine I was I was expecting this this is why I did the movie unacknowledged and the reason I
did the book unacknowledged was because we wanted to have this information in the public before they started running their scams because I knew it was coming because what they were doing is that they were going to start doing a fake disclosure that portrayed the aliens as a threat that would then create the foundation for war in space and world war three which in 1955 if you
read Douglas MacArthur's speech he said world war three will be interplanetary that we need to unite the nations of the world Ronald Reagan said we need we can unite the world around an alien threat this has been worked on for 70 years they have had a 60 to 70 year plan long-term plan to play play the fake alien threat card and we're seeing it before our