THE CLONES OF EDEN
One of the unique privileges of PARRC Research is the opportunity to be one of the few Christian ministries that “speaks to” the issues of the day in a way which provides the clarity, logic, and “view from a height” that the Bible invariably brings.
The prevailing issues of the day include stem cell research and “cloning—” and I put this greatly misunderstood process in quotation marks on purpose.
Science fiction writers for decades have written—and accurately so—about the process of cloning as a future, super-scientific process in which a new human being is produced from the cellular DNA of the original.
The concept of “cloning,” in its pure and accurate sense, is found in the writings of the great s-f authors—like Heinlein, Bradbury, Bixby, and Ellison. They wove fantastic stories around these types of beings, and described as the story allowed the circumstances in which they found themselves, replete with ramifications and repercussions.
I am writing this document to put to rest the controversial perversion of the nomenclature “cloning” and how the misappropriation of the clear understanding of the process can lead to the wrong conclusions about the process.
The bio-ethics of the situation aside (the soulish component, the “all men are created equal” dictum, etc.), let us take a look at the definition of “cloning” from Microsoft Encarta:
“Cloning, creating a copy of living matter, such as a cell or organism. The copies produced through cloning have identical genetic makeup and are known as clones.” (© 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.)
Here is a pictorial of a typical cloning process:
Genetic engineering enables scientists to produce clones of cells or organisms that contain the same genes. 1. Scientists use restriction enzymes to isolate a segment of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) that contains a gene of interest—for example, the gene regulating insulin production.
2. A plasmid extracted from a bacterium and treated with the same restriction enzyme can hybridize with this fragment’s “sticky” ends of complementary DNA. 3. The hybrid plasmid is reincorporated into the bacterium, where it replicates as part of the cell’s DNA. 4. A large number of identical daughter cells (clones) can be cultured and their gene products extracted for human use. (© Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved.)
The reason that Advanced Idea Mechanics scoffs at the idea that the word “clone” should be so liberally utilized is that it should be made plain—if not by this process, then certainly by the definition—that a CLONE has no actual mother or father!
While the liberal and nomenclaturally-incorrect notion of cloning includes virtually all genetically-induced copies or replicants of living “creatures,” it should not be so; let’s take a look at what a REAL clone would be like according to the science fiction that formed the foundation of the concept, and the actual science that is involved—
—and then AIM will show you how this was done in Eden…
The strict and pure process of cloning would utilize one of the mysterious characteristics that God imbued into each and every living cell: it is a replete repository of all of the data describing the exact nature and characteristic of the full creature. This data is stored in strings of genetic material called deoxy-ribonucleic acid, or DNA.
The perfection of this data storage—and the use for the replication of the creature itself—forms the nucleus (no pun intended) for the ability for the science of cloning to even be pursued—but it also lays one fundamental principle which is violated by virtually every current “cloning” process reported in the dailies: a mother or father are not a part of the process—not in the sense that they would normally participate.
In other words: if you use the sperm from a father; if you use the egg from a mother; and if in either case, you use a female as a incubator for gestation and maturity to birth—
—it is not a clone.
A clone would be GROWN from virtually ONE CELL of the molecular matter of the creature—resulting in an exact duplicate of the creature (irrespective of age)—as a standalone process!
In the recent movie from the “Star Trek, The Next Generation” series of movies, Nemesis, the plot surrounds a Reman character named Shinzon—who is a clone of Jean-Luc Picard.
This clone was created through the obtaining of suitable molecular material for the cloning process—one hair would be sufficient, or a fingernail (God works in mysterious ways).
Remember my argument that it is science fiction (while confused often with flights of fancy and the impossible in the same way that Christianity is confused with myth, storytelling, and legend) is the curator of concept: and it will protect the concepts upon which it is based by depicting the pure processes which is describes.
Shinzon, the Reman cousin to the Romulans, had no mother or father: HE was a CLONE.
Now let’s look at three other types of “homo sapiens/adamus” who had no mothers or fathers:
1) In Genesis Chapter One, when God created “homo-sapiens” (‘male and female CREATED He them’), they had NO MOTHER OR FATHER; they simply appeared in a process of superscience that we would refer to as a miracle—the power of creation; in a stretch of a sense—and for the sake of categorization—this could be called “Primary Level Cloning;”
2) In Genesis Chapter Two, when God created Adam (homo adamus) from the “dust of the Earth” (obviously a different process than the one in Genesis Chapter One), he used a process which was posited between strict creation and cloning: God took the molecular material of the earth itself (with all of the characteristics that it possesses so that Adam could reflect a endowment called “dominion”) and IMBUED it with the requisite DNA and RNA combinations of genetic material from which Adam could be made. He then replicated these cells in the same type of growth process found in true cloning—and in a matter of time, Adam was fully formed. This then could be called “Secondary Level Cloning.”
3) Then, when God determined that Adam needed a “help-meet,” He put him to sleep and did a curious thing: he used the genetic material found in one of Adam’s ribs (logically for the rich compounds found in the marrow, where blood cells are created) and CLONED Eve! BUT—even more remarkable—since he did not want an exact duplicate Adam walking around as a friend to the original (again, He said he wanted to give Adam a “help-meet—” someone to be a companion, but with the required differences for pair-bonding), he DIFFERENTIATED the XX and/or XY-chromosomal pairs to create a female homo adamus! Concordantly, in this “Tertiary Level Cloning,” he invented a process which we will NEVER be able to duplicate!
Any attempt that man could mount—in success—that would actually result in a clone would be a Quadrary Level Cloning; but it would have to be from a single cell or cells, have no mother or father involved, and be grown in a process of incubation which eventually results in a genetic duplicate of the original. If what we are doing today can be liberally called cloning, it would be Pentary-Level Cloning, using cells, maternal and paternal donors, and maternal incubation.
JUST THINK: God has already done it millennia before—in the Garden Of Eden—and God is so great that it is only “editorially” referenced in the Bible! It is time for science to be reunited with the miracles of the Bible, and God given the glory: we must wake up!
Here is an interesting side-note, just to whet your interest in creation, and Eden:
OMNI Magazine, in 1978, reported that the area referred to as the “Fertile Crescent—” postulated to be the region that Eden was in—possesses an unusual property: the DIRT in the region displays an unusual galvanic response. This galvanism is concordant with an electrical property coincident with the materials in the dirt.
The Bible says that Adam was “formed from the dust of the earth…” in Genesis 2; it is the postulation of Advanced Idea Mechanics that there MIGHT have been three creations: the one referred to in Genesis 1:1; the one referred to, and starting in Genesis 1:2; and the third one depicted in Genesis, Chapter 2.
It is popularly believed that Genesis 2 is a redundant “re-telling” of Genesis One—except great gaps exist in the “re-told” creation events: certain things were not done, because they had already been accomplished. It is because—according to AIM’s model—God was doing a “special” creation—that of Eden, and the subsequent “garden,” and the Priest-King, with dominion over all the earth, TO follow. Why did He create the Garden? It was the type of special place for Adam to live—specifically engineered for his enhanced “endowments—” and the interesting thing is he was created from this “special” dirt…
—and hence, was literally a “Superman:” the perfect glorified “human,” with possibly TWELVE endowments; four virtues, four estates, and four physicalities (all but five were lost in the fall). This would be consistent with this fact: the homo-sapiens hunter-gatherers created in Genesis 1 (“male and female created He THEM—” or all simultaneously) were made of typical dirt—but Adam, in Genesis 2, was made of the special dirt in the Garden of Eden (all by himself—in the Garden, until the cloning of Eve)! WHAT IF?
________________________________________________________________________________________________
PARRC Research, Inc., 2004-2010, All Rights And Trademarks Reserved