Thanks Someotherguy for pitching in with explanations for the newbie. Much more is in the threads, with quite a few links. A good starting place would
be the radio broadcasts of Dr Beter who was the first to out this Conspiracy. There is a lot of information available by using simple word searches on
the internet, and we've pretty much plugged into a lot of what's out there right here in these two threads. So all it takes is enough curiosity to
read and a bit of time and effort to put one's mind to work?
Originally posted by LiveForever8
But why aren't the clones EXACTLY the same as the originals?
Again, LiveForever8, this is a place where we are seeking the truth, the replies to your questions have already been expressed before in these pages.
This isn't a tutorial on what Cloning is, how to Clone or even how to recognize a Clone. Nonetheless, since this is a long thread and apparently the
pictures are too much of a distraction, I can recapitulate for you some of the key information in a nutshell.
Clones are physically similar to an identical twin of the original DNA donor. Their coding sequences are replicated and grown into a new body, which
resembles the original one very closely. There are several features which are always identical. These are general head shape, feature positioning on
the skull, facial proportions, relative distances and angles between features, jawline, cheekbones, brow bone ridge, forehead slope and size, position
and angle of anchoring bone at the top of the nose, nostril anchoring on cheeks, ear placement on head and inner ear structure. Fingerprints are
always different with twins.
Features which can be different even for naturally born identical twins can be height, cartilage and soft tissues, eye positioning within the orbits,
ear lobes (possible altered surgically), hairline at a given age and anything else subject to nutritional or environmental conditions. Features which
can be altered by intervention on a Clone are finger prints, eye color, hair color, and any usual modifications enabled by plastic surgery.
Furthermore, there are a number of factors which make it difficult for those without experience or expertise in facial recognition and unable to tell
what people look like to detect Clones. These are often quite simple. It can be a simple change of 'disguise' due to the Clone wearing glasses when
the original didn't, or sporting a mustache or a beard. Also a different hair style or manner of dress will often throw observers off track. When the
original is dressed in period clothing, their modern Clone will seem quite different.
Finally, there is the way one carries oneself, along with behavioral attitude and demeanor which reveal that it is NOT the same person. This however
doesn't mean it isn't a Clone, it only means that the original person has not time travelled to come forth again in another era. Yes, it is a
different individual, just like two twins are not one and the same person.
Originally posted by LiveForever8
Also, how do these interests get the material needed to clone someone who originally lived 200 years ago, for instance?
Human remains contain DNA, and even people who have been cremated might have left behind some traces of DNA in stray hears or even nail clippings.
This is sufficient to "grow" an entire new individual. There is the traditional way of creating Clones, by fertilizing a female egg with the DNA
from cells and then implanting the egg in the womb. This provides a Clone which is born quite normally with traditional childbirth delivery methods.
The Clone can even be raised by the 'mother' or taken and raised institutionally.
There are reports of "accelerated" Clone growing entirely in laboratory conditions under which a Clone's aging can be accelerated in order to
produce an Adult Clone in record time. This might facilitate remote controlling the Clone due to its absence of contamination by society and
education. However it seems to carry the corollary disadvantage of such Clones aging rapidly and quickly becoming dysfunctional, requiring replacement
by another copy.
Regarding how one might find Human Remains dating back that long? The Illuminati came out into the open and publicly declared their presence in 1776.
Hence they were in a position then, and possibly before, to collect what are traditionally called "relics" and/or human remains. Their American
branch established at Yale University in 1832 as #2 (hence its code name 322?) is known for collecting human remains of famous people. This is
probably why it is called Skull & Bones. Here is how it is done, this is just one example:
Among the traditional artifacts collected and maintained within the High Street Tomb are human remains of various derivations. The following
concerns one such set of Skull and Bones.
CLICK HERE to read about Bush's Own Bones