The Clone Conspiracy: Stars and Celebrity Clones

page: 17
37
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 20 2013 @ 01:46 AM
link   
reply to post by mike_trivisonno
 


Hi Mike,

Firstly, while I've been thinking about various issues regarding human cloning for some time, and noted sufficient occurrences of lookalikes in key political or notoriety positions to be mere coincidence, I am not a self-proclaimed expert in cloning or a geneticist. However, the most logical explanation of the frequency of bio-reproduction seen in genetic traits among the ruling classes of the past and present brought me to make these allegations of a Clone Conspiracy, posted in two threads here at ATS. While I recall that it might have been brought up more in detail by another member in the Clone Conspiracy thread dedicated to Political Clones, I shall nonetheless respond to the best of my ability to your question about changing the gender of clones.

Yes, any individual may modify their gender, this can be done surgically or genetically. Obviously, the genetic procedure is far more effective and it has been something which geneticists have been tinkering for quite some time. Much of our livestock is raised using such research and they even have engineered hermaphrodite salmon for use on our dinner tables. The jury is out as to whether, to what extent and with what results or consequences this can be done by modifying the genes of a fully grown adult specimen. However, when tweaking and splicing DNA in an unborn ovum, it is apparently a rather simple intervention.

So, of course one can create a clone and simply modify the gender, the rest of the DNA remaining that of an original donor. So you could get a Schwarzenegger girlie girl or a Dolly Parton male stripper. It's all in the genetic technology which is far more easily intervened upon that we have been told. All is a matter of knowledge. Once you know how to do something, it's just a matter of wanting it done. The knowledge gap is apparently not what we imagine it to be today, with certain parties having a high degree of technology and others kept in darkness.

GS

edit on 20-5-2013 by Getsmart because: a Clone of any sex is still a Clone.




posted on May, 20 2013 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by pyramidikal
 


Hi Pyramidika,

Being feature blind is not a serious problem, as long as you don't need to identify anyone. However, I would hate to be confronted with you in a police lineup. Oh, he's the guy with a nose, yeah, the one with two nostrils! LOL


reply to post by billdadobbie
 


I see from your Avatar and comments that you enjoy the occasional smoke. I hope you're having fun surfing the Internet and seeing what it feels like when you're stoned. However, if you do ever come down from your high, you might find it unpleasantly sobering that somebody is probably Cloning at least certain humans and placing them in positions of power and influence. There's that other thread here showing twice as many Cloned politicians, mostly created out of the DNA of members of Royal Bloodlines. This should be a nice fuzzy thought to wake up to...

GS

edit on 20-5-2013 by Getsmart because: hey, those guys are Clones… pass me the joint ! ! !



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by UNIT76
phew. i reached the summit.. (interesting reading)

a young guy called Donald Marshall is doing the rounds lately talking about clones and cloning facilities.
there's an interview available to download from the vinny eastwood radio show website.
apparently he's on a MegaDeath album cover (all cut up with a skeleton rising out of his chest)

there's some old civil war photo's with a guy who looks a lot like Nicholas Cage.

i've got my tinfoil hat on.. but given enough time, i'm sure we'd see people who look like other people.
i don't know what's going on here but it was worth reading
thanks for posting!


Hi UNIT76,

Glad you've joined us and given some thought to this problem set. Sorry, but from his letter which mixes tons of valid information at random, sort of like in a robot blender, adding dramatization doses and wild claims, he is quite the con artist as can be readily detected in a few moments of viewing his demeanor in this video, which fully contradicts his claims by utter discrepancy in behavior.



Whether he is a self-promoting opportunist hoping to surf on the wave of conspiracy theorists, a delusional wannabe or even an unwitting low level agency stooge, I don't buy a parcel or speck of his stories. He serves to discredit those who really did live such ordeals or encountered in fact similar events. I know that such practices do occur, maybe not with the showcasing and protocol he describes, but with in fact much more cruelty than he suggests. He has read a lot on the internet and recites in random order adding his own touches of fantasy, mixing in stories about Clones and calling himself one in order to create interest in his own persona. The dude is a slime-ball version of Cheech and Chong gone zombie vampire? LOL and thanks for the chuckle.

Regarding time passing, and thinking that if you wait long enough people will wind up looking more like other people if you give it a chance, it is actually quite the contrary phenomenon at work. If given time, one starts to notice differences between individuals one didn't see before.

For example, If you see somebody in a service station mini market who looks just like Brad Pitt you might say "Wow, is that him?" However, if you work in the same place and he is your colleague you see him every day, all day long, you may start to notice any number of physical discrepancies such as that his nose is longer, his ears are different, his jawline is not at all similar, etc.

While our minds can play tricks on us in terms of incorrectly recognizing key features and drawing the wrong conclusions, they can also help us discern differences, fortunately. This is done by verifying and cross referencing not only specific features but also head size and shape, skull openings and positioning, feature distribution and distances between them, and the general disposition of the entire face.

Evidence of this can be noted by asking yourself how often you see somebody who looks EXACTLY like your mother? Seldom if ever, and more probably never. Why? Because you know her features intimately and would only recognize a person as being her if that individual was actually her or maybe a 100% identical clone of her. This means that we are in fact extremely sensitive to tiny differences between individuals, and when we cannot specify what is different, then we are not really paying attention to either one of these individuals or to either of them.

Saying people just sort of look alike doesn't mean a thing. Either they are identical in the relevant proportions, angles, distances, feature implantation and hard tissues (soft ones can differ) or they are relevantly different in one key feature or in proportions, angles and distances. Those who claim that a person being examined for evidence of being a clone is simply somebody with a passing resemblance, must back this up with statements about what key feature is not acceptable as proof of similarity. Without this, one is just proving they are incapable of a physiognomic analysis of facial features.

Getsmart



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Getsmart
 


I find your threads about the clone conspiracy to be fascinating. One frightening outcome of this gender assignment is that an elite, if they are so inclined, can clone themselves into both genders and then produce offspring or even entire families of offspring. It seems that such activities might be perceived as necessary among those families that already practice incest in effort to keep their bloodline pure.

Again thanks for your reply.
edit on 20-5-2013 by mike_trivisonno because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Hi Mike,

Your preoccupation with this dilemma honors you, as we are visibly at considerable risk when it comes to the unlegislated rampant Cloning being done by our power elite. You point out something which hadn't been brought up before here in these threads, and that is the potential for twin reproduction by virtue of identical Cloned individuals of both genders reproducing together.

However, even if such practices are pursued at times for purposes of furthering Royal Bloodlines, it does not seem to be the way of the future where external intervention and industrial wombs may be used to hatch future generations, instead of relying on the soul bonds of child-bearing and parenting in its natural form. There could however be certain far reaching implications for the pattern you suggest of pairing genetically identical characteristics in both genders as a means of further reducing the differences in the resulting population.

Regarding the broader implications of cloning, I will quote here my latest post in the other Clone Conspiracy thread which resumes the problem set in its wider traits for contemplation and further analysis. Hence I share my current conclusion, which is not focused on a particular culprit in terms of their identification as a group or as specific individuals, but according to certain characteristics of the phenomenon which cannot be ignored.


FIRST

Clones are being used to govern our societies. This is done in most if not all countries. It has been a de facto state of affairs for a very long time. How long is not yet established, but probably longer than we imagine.


SECOND

Our DNA is the object of considerable attention for over one century, at least since the emergence of the Eugenics society and probably since considerably earlier. DNA has been sourced among Royal Families and key personalities from past history. There are bloodline characteristics which are being given priority treatment in the selection of DNA donors for Cloning. In addition specific individuals who became noted for their feats or accomplishments have also been selected as DNA sources.


THIRD

There is a strong likelihood that Human Cloning is about to advance to a greater scale deployment, with it being spearheaded in public under the guise of the increased adoption brought about by recently legitimized same sex marriages and sterilization of populations by way of pollutants, chemical contamination and bioengineered GMO foods.


FOURTH

The naturally born human population is likely slated for extinction, as we know it, if plans follow their current trajectory. We may soon be replaced by a society of genetically engineered designer Clones artificially enhanced for specialized technical missions, and a separate subsociety of purposely handicapped and downgraded mutants used for lower tasks and grunt work.


CONCLUSION

At present we are not yet replaced but serve certain purposes including maybe being placeholders for an upcoming replacement population. Clones are perhaps gradually infiltrating the general population and, thanks to their human appearance, they remain entirely stealth until they become the dominant, and eventually sole inhabitants of earth in human form?

While it stands to reason that there are complicities among the Royal Households, the Illuminati and secret societies such as the higher levels of Freemasonry associated with the intelligence agency Black Ops, whose agenda the Clone Conspiracy has been designed to serve is not yet established.

It could be some human group such as a Nazi continuum (not restricted to Germany), an international Zionist movement (not to be confused with Judaism or the Israeli population), international Leninism (not to be confused with communism), the Vatican and its Jesuit Order (not to be confused with Catholics) or a historic underground organization such as the Knights Templar.

It would more likely be a non human agenda, given its extremely inhuman vocation in violation of the most fundamental ethics and its vocation to commit crimes against the human conscience. Theories about extraterrestrial aliens with the ability to wield high technology and act using tacit means without being detected abound. Some theories speculate that we have been continuously bred as technicians, warriors and slaves to be used for nefarious purposes to which only our ruling elite are privy. Segments of the population, beyond mere sample size, have been disappearing for many years from various regions of our planet. For what purposes remains still a mystery and the extraterrestrial hypothesis remains as viable as any other.


Getsmart



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 03:46 AM
link   
In the other Clone Conspiracy thread right here at ATS, the one dedicated to our Cloned Political Leaders, you will have noticed that I had compared these Cloned Politicians to "Human Thoroughbreds". And such efforts by those seeking to improve the multiple characteristics of their cattle, is clearly a very ordinary preoccupation which has become mundane, expected and even desired among those owning livestock.


It brings to light that we humans are clearly considered by our governing Elite, or those ruling over it be they human or non-human, to be nothing more than two legged livestock. And our key individuals selected by society for leadership roles or other forms of preeminence as celebrities or stars are hence nothing more in their eyes than prime specimens among the others, selected and bred for their potential characteristics like so many race horses.


The following news snippet outlines the controversy about Clones in an interesting parallel with what is going on today in the strife about the integration of Clones into the general population of breeders' animals, and the question as to whether natural breeding methods such as those used both with animals and humans by social selection are to be differentiated with the emergence of large numbers of Clones.



DALLAS (Reuters) - A Texas jury has ruled that a horse association violated anti-monopoly laws by banning cloned animals from its prestigious registry, a decision that could encourage cloning and open the way for the animals to participate in lucrative horse races.
Two Texas breeders, rancher Jason Abraham and veterinarian Gregg Veneklasen, sued the American Quarter Horse Association last year, asserting the group was operating a monopoly by excluding clones.
A federal court jury in Amarillo, Texas, decided on Tuesday that the ban on clones violated federal and state antitrust laws, but did not award the $6 million in damages sought.
The association said it was disappointed with the jury verdict and was considering an appeal. A court hearing will be held soon to determine whether the association will be forced to open its register as a result of the verdict, officials said.
No other horse breeding registry allows cloned animals, although the Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association allows cloned horses to compete in rodeos.

Texas jury rules ban on registering cloned horses violates law


We can note that not only do Cloned horses compete in Rodeos, but that Cloned humans are unofficially competing in many areas of our society. When you consider that it is far easier to Clone humans than any other mammal, it stands to reason that there are today very many Human Clones present in all walks of life, with key areas targeted. Just like with these highly selected Clones for rodeos, they are probably more present in areas of high competition with greater stakes than in areas where little of interest is in the balance. So be sure to look more intently for Human Clones wherever there is power, money and fame than in the more mundane walks of life.


Getsmart



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   

~ ~ ~ BREAKING NEWS ~ ~ ~ BREAKING NEWS ~ ~ ~ BREAKING NEWS ~ ~ ~ BREAKING




I must report a story which was first released in the most renowned blog outlining the murder and replacement of James Paul McCartney of Beatles fame, back in 1966. It is the PlasticMacca blog run by Tina Foster.


This has apparently opened a PANDORA'S BOX !


It brings evidence of the replacement of James Paul McCartney by a CLONE which is yet another stone to the edifice of the CLONE CONSPIRACY. The original bloodline donor of DNA for the Clone we shall call hereafter FAUL McCartney, was the Roman Emperor Justinian.





The choice was made for the first clone of Justinian to replace London's most celebrated Buffoon, and later for the second one to replace the most beloved of The Beatles, James Paul McCartney.


Joseph Grimaldi beneath his makeup




The Times noted in 1813:

Grimaldi is the most assiduous of all imaginable buffoons and it is absolutely surprising that any human head or hide can resist the rough trials he volunteers. Serious tumbles from serious heights, innumerable kicks, and incessant beatings come on him as matters of common occurrence, and leave him every night fresh and free for the next night's flagellation.

Wikipedia page for Joseph Grimaldi


Regarding the true identity of Joseph Grimaldi, we can see on his wikipedia page that he is clearly at least two different individuals, for there are aesthetic divergences which are far too great to be dismissed as merely due to artistic interpretation of a sitter or the ravages of aging. Just like James Paul McCartney and his current replacement impostor Sir Faul, we will notice that the later version of Joseph Grimaldi is clearly identical to the character who has replaced the beloved Beatle "Paul".


Identical to Sir Faul two hundred years ago



The above engraving is found on the Frontispiece of his biography edited by Charles DIckens under the pseudonym BOZ, yet another engraving conforms this resemblance.


DIckens' book about the life of Joseph Grimaldi



The other engraving showing Joseph Grimaldi's impostor



It is interesting to note that he is also presumably an individual Cloned from the DNA of Roman Emperor Justinian, used to replace Joseph Grimaldi, who was most likely murdered as well as to replace Paul McCartney of the Beatles who was likely murdered in 1966. This can be attested to not only by the Mosaic portrait of this Byzantine Roman Emperor, but also by an engraved medal which survives him.


Medal of Emperor Justinian



Justinian's portrait on Recto



Then it comes to the identity of the original genuine Joseph Grimaldi who was presumably murdered and replaced. His painted portraits are too well executed for this difference to be attributed to the painter's lack of skill or to artistic license, for it is clearly not the same person. In fact, he looks far more like current day actor identified by Someotherguy as possibly being Robert Downey Jr.


The original Joseph Grimaldi and Robert Downey Jr




The logical premise which can be drawn from this potential cloning of the original creator of modern clowns and master of Pantomime, would be that his talents were not left wasted by the Clone Conspirators, who recovered his DNA and used it to Clone a modern day actor, Robert Downey Jr.


There is another individual who worked closely with Joseph Grimaldi, presumably before his replacement, who first appeared on the scene as Ballet Master during a theatre theatre production where they both collaborated. He looks quite familiar, bearing an uncanny resemblance to the original James Paul McCartney, his first name also happens to be James.


Ballet Dancer and Choreographer James D'Egville



Whether his DNA was also used for Cloning purposes in the 20th century, I leave such conclusions to the reader, contenting myself with signaling an uncanny resemblance between these two individuals.




...he [Joseph Grimaldi] was asked to choreograph John Tobin's play, The Honey Moon, at Drury Lane on short notice. He accepted on the proviso that his wages be increased for the show's entire run and not just until a new dancing instructor was found. The Drury Lane management agreed to pay Grimaldi £2 more per week.[86] A few weeks into his new assignment, management appointed James D'Egville as the new ballet master. D'Egville's debut production was Terpsichore's Return, in which Grimaldi played Pan, a role which he considered to be one of his best assignments to date.

Wikipedia page for Joseph Grimaldi



Capitalizing on the fame and reputation of the original in order to sway the ways and customs of the population was the agenda, just as in the case of Paul McCartney's assassination and replacement with a similar criminal Modus Operandi, one and a half centuries later.


Joseph Grimaldi influencing British Society through comedy



Interestingly, the contrary was the case for Joseph Grimaldi who was widely praised even for performances he was himself unsatisfied with. A case in point, taken from his Wikipedia page:



Mother Goose was a runaway success with its London audiences and earned an extraordinary profit of £20,000. It completed a run of 111 performances over a two-year residency, a record for any London theatre production at the time. Grimaldi, however, considered the performance to be one of the worst of his career and became depressed. Critics thought differently, attributing the pantomime's success to Grimaldi's performance.[48] It prompted one critic from European Magazine to write: "We have not for several years witnessed a Pantomime more attractive than this: whether we consider the variety and ingenuity of the mechanical devices [or] the whim, humour, and agility of the Harlequin, Clown and Pantaloon". Kemble stated that Grimaldi had "proved himself [as] the great master of his art", while the actress Mrs Jordan called him "a genius ... yet unapproached". The production regularly played to packed audiences.


Here again we have a similar phenomenon of the hijacking of an extraordinary reputation built upon genuine talent which is widely recognized. Another parallel creating a pattern is his replacement by a Clone of Justinian devoid of such talent, but who carries out a propagandist social engineering agenda for his handlers who Cloned him.


And the rabbit hole goes deeper yet...


Echoing the mysteries surrounding the use of Clones in the entertainment industry for at least two centuries, as per this compelling evidence. The son of Joseph Grimaldi, named Joseph Samuel William Grimaldi but more widely known as J.S. Grimaldi, bears an uncanny resemblance to yet another contemporary personality.


Let us note that the original Joseph Grimaldi's facial structure was partially recognizable under his makeup, as being the one portrayed in the two oil paintings from his prime. The engraving shows him quite changed, in fact changed for an impostor who is gaunt and has very different features and bone structure. The original Clown shown represented here, is clearly chunkier and despite the makeup still looks like a disguised Robert Downey Jr.


The original Joseph Grimaldi who invented the modern clown makeup



However, there are other representations where he doesn't at all look like the original, but more like the Justinian Clone who replaced him. It is the case of this image where he is in a pantomime with his son J.S. Grimaldi.


Impostor of Joseph Grimaldi with J.S. Grimaldi ?



But the rabbit hole gets deeper yet, as Joseph Grimaldi's son is not entirely unknown to us, given that it seems that he may have been an identical Clone to one which graces the silver screen in our current times, none other than Hollywood actor Nicholas Cage.


Joseph Samuel William Grimaldi in a period engraving



The already known Clone Nicholas Cage was mentioned earlier in the pages of this thread... and we can legitimately ask ourselves the question as to whether or not the Grimaldi son and Nicholas Cage were - just as the Grimaldi impostor and the Paul McCartney impostor were both Cloned from Emperor Justinian - possibly from a series of Clones sourced from far more ancient DNA from a Royal Bloodline ?


Interestingly, the case of Joseph Grimaldi's son is rather mystifying, as he changed his behavior towards his "father" suddenly, which could possibly be an act of defiance towards his impostor. At that very time he noted a rapid end to his career, seeing opportunities diminish while coming onto hard times. Finally, he died of an alleged suicide, after a failed attempt at slitting his own throat, a rare method of taking one's own life if there ever was one. His alleged parents were also taken with a common attraction to suicide, allegedly. More information can be found in the Joseph Grimaldi Wikipedia page.



The relationship between Grimaldi and his son first became strained during the early 1820s. JS, who had made a career of emulating his father's act, received favourable notices as Clown, but his success was constantly overshadowed by that of his father. He became resentful of his father and publicly shunned any association with him. JS became an alcoholic and was increasingly unreliable. In 1823, he became estranged from his parents, who saw their son only occasionally over the next four years, as JS went out of his way to avoid them. They communicated only through letters, with Grimaldi often sending his son notes begging for money. JS once replied: "At present I am in difficulties; but as long as I have a shilling you shall have half". However, there is no record of him ever sending money to his father. JS finally returned home in 1827, when the Grimaldis were awakened one night to discover their son standing in the street, feverish, emaciated and dishevelled.

...In 1832, Grimaldi, Mary and their son moved to Woolwich,[161] but JS often abused his parents' hospitality by bringing home prostitutes and fighting in the house with his alcoholic friends.[162] He moved out later that year and died at his lodgings on 11 December 1832, aged 30.[163][164] With Grimaldi almost crippled, and Mary having suffered a stroke days before JS's death, they made a suicide pact. They took some poison, but the only result was a long bout of stomach cramps. Dismayed at their failure, they abandoned the idea of suicide.

Wikipedia page of Joseph Grimaldi



For more details of the life of this uncanny lookalike of Nicholas Cage, you can consult Wikipedia page of JS Grimaldi also. Here is an excerpt below.



JS Grimaldi died at age 30 on 11 December 1832 in Tottenham and was interred at Whitefield's Tabernacle. The cause of his death remains a mystery and was treated with some suspicion. Although he had been an alcoholic and had suffered from epilepsy and bouts of mental illness for many years, there were suspicions that he had been poisoned or had died as a result of injuries sustained in a drunken brawl. His parents were devastated by his death and attempted suicide but survived. His mother died in 1834, and his father survived him by five years.

J.S. Grimaldi Wikipedia page



We can note that it there were suspicions of poisoning, and also that it is said that days later both his parents were apparently poisoned. This is an unlikely coincidence that 3 members of the same family should seek to poison themselves at the same time. A criminal poisoning sounds more likely, especially if they knew too much and had become Cumbersome Clones.


Which begs the question,


"Is the DNA found in this grave identical to that of Sir Faul McCartney ?"


Joseph Grimaldi's grave in St. James Churchyard, Pentonville




THE CLONE CONSPIRACY GETS DEEPER YET !


Getsmart
edit on 22-8-2013 by Getsmart because: Are there any Celebrities who are NOT Clones ? ? ?



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 05:08 AM
link   
We have seen above that the DNA of a Roman Emperor, Justinian, was used at least twice for the replacement of two different celebrities, once for Joseph Grimaldi and again for James Paul McCartney of the Beatles. It seems that Roman Emperors have been quite popular as a basis for the Placement or Re-Placement of High Profile Individuals, as has been noted consistently in the other Clone Conspiracy thread in this forum section dedicated to Political Clones. Today we will take notice of another Roman Emperor, Hadrian, who was Cloned as a well-knwon actor - Peter Ustinov.




We shall compare a bust of Hadrian from Roman antiquity with a poster of the 1960 film Spartacus showing Peter Ustinov in the role of Lentulus Batiatus, owner of the Roman Gladiator School from which Spartacus once escaped.




This is a resemblance I recently discovered while visiting the antiquity collections of the Art Institute of Chicago where there is a bust which resembles Ustinov, although without a nose! This brought me to consider the possibility that he had been sourced in Hadrian's DNA.




Interestingly this Clone of Roman Emperor Hadrian was cast in a role of another Roman Emperor Nero in the 1959 film Ben Hur.



Here we can see again Peter Ustinov's striking resemblance with another bust of Hadrian.




We are clearly in the presence of an odd phenomenon, of the repeating of the DNA of alleged "great men" in new incarnations as Stars, Celebrities, Politicians and persons of influence. This trend is extensive and must be caused by some form of causation: there is a reason for which we can witness statistically impossible repeats of the same DNA in people with an eminent position in society.


Getsmart



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 05:13 AM
link   
OMG OP you have discovered some people look like other people...

Sorry but most of your examples just have a vague resemblance to each other, that is all, cloned? nope even If they had been cloned they would not necessarily look the same.
Look into the cloning of pets and how many people complain because Tiddles 2 doesn't look anything like Tiddles 1.
I have met my double it was like looking into the mirror does that mean I was cloned? (the fella was 2 years older than me).



posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Hi Get Smart I'm a newby to ATS.I have been enjoying the thread thus far and firstly would like to thank you others for your tireless and productive efforts....so much so it has caused me to sign up and jump in.
Firstly I noticed the pic of the young garabaldi and your reference to nic cage but respectfully I did not see it and after staring at length I came up with the possibility that Ben Affleck may be the clone. Also check out Mark Twain (especially one pic)and billy Connolly.when i came up with goggle (typo intended)search of BC images billys name appeared heaps accepting the Mark Twain award. synchronism everywhere.
now to keep reading . All this cloning stuff is a missing piece in the deception puzzle for my research ...thanks and cheers reply to post by Getsmart
 





posted on Sep, 21 2013 @ 11:27 AM
link   

boymonkey74

Sorry but most of your examples just have a vague resemblance to each other, that is all, cloned? nope even If they had been cloned they would not necessarily look the same. Look into the cloning of pets and how many people complain because Tiddles 2 doesn't look anything like Tiddles 1.


Hi Boy Monkey,


Thanks for your contribution, unwittingly you have helped many better understand one of the key difficulties of identifying Clones from just people who resemble others. In fact, you are quite right. Tiddles 2 won't totally resemble Tiddles 1 for the same reason that you are unable to accept that those identified here as probably Clones are in your mind not at al Clones. This is because much of what we see when we examine an individual is actually the person "INSIDE" rather than their Meat Wrapper.


Therefore, identical twins raised apart and with very different personalities may not look all that much alike, especially if they dress, vary in hairstlye and act quite differently. Folks will even say that they don't look anything alike. However, strip them and shave them and verify every aspect of their anatomy and analyse their DNA and you will find that it is in fact identical. Only their fingerprints and minor cartilage and soft tissue placement such as eye anchoring will differ. One may have a larger nose than the other, one may be fat and the other thin, one may be taller thanks to a better diet, etc. Yet they are indeed genetic replicas of one another. The same holds true for Clones.



boymonkey74
I have met my double it was like looking into the mirror does that mean I was cloned? (the fella was 2 years older than me).


Well Boy Monkey, I don't know you nor your alleged "body double" so I cannot reply as to whether you were Cloned or not. However, it is clear to me that there have been individuals "Cloned in series" and placed in families in different regions of the country and even in different countries. This phenomenon has been noted and revealed by different members finding this to be a potential trend. Mind you, these are not necessarily Lab Produced accelerated growth Clones, but implanted embryos (during abductions?) or clones swapped at birth in maternities. So you might indeed be a Clone, but from what can be noted from the trends we can detect, it would be far more likely to be probably if you could identify an earlier example of you which would justify somebody Cloning their DNA for its exceptional characteristics, either by their belonging to a Royal Lineage or in order to preserve the genetic virtues of incredible achievers who have marked world history.


Thanks for making an effort in reconsidering. Of course, only scientific DNA testing by a lab using certain DNA samples from the original individual can help prove the case, although some may have been tampered with anywhere along the chain from the original burial sites to every weak link in the chain down to the lab itself, which might not be necessarily as honest and reliable as we might wish. In my opinion, only high security agencies are in a position to take such a query to its logical conclusion, using multiple sources for sampling of ancient genetic material and testing them through their own teams of dedicated scientists whom they can trust.


There are a number of elements which can help differentiate between lookalikes and Clones, and had you given better care to reading the many posts in this thread and the other Clone thread in this same forum section, you would have seen the great measure of care used to eliminate lookalikes from among Clone candidates during the identification process. We can use the next member's contributions here to examine both the validity of his claim, as well as to debunk quite a few lookalikes as being merely that, people who sort of look a lot like a well known personality. You may read more about this in my next reply.


Getsmart



posted on Sep, 21 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Steeler64

Hi Get Smart I'm a newby to ATS.I have been enjoying the thread thus far and firstly would like to thank you others for your tireless and productive efforts....so much so it has caused me to sign up and jump in.



Hi Steeler64,


Thanks indeed for such a compliment which is quite an honor. Let us remember that these two Cloning threads are highly speculative, but there are patterns which can be detected which make an interesting case for the premise that Human Cloning is indeed occurring, and my have been going on for quite some time. We'll have time to discuss all this further - Welcome aboard !



Steeler64

Firstly I noticed the pic of the young garabaldi and your reference to nic cage but respectfully I did not see it and after staring at length I came up with the possibility that Ben Affleck may be the clone.



Thanks Steeler, I shall address this interesting candidate shortly, with some data possibly comparing genetically inherited characteristics possibly derived by natural heredity with alternative Cloning possibilities. More soon.



Steeler64

Also check out Mark Twain (especially one pic)and billy Connolly.when i came up with goggle (typo intended)search of BC images billys name appeared heaps accepting the Mark Twain award. synchronism everywhere.



Here also, as told to Boy Monkey above, this candidate deserves serious consideration for a number of factors, and we shall see how it can be possible to disambiguate between lookalikes and potential Clones for the purpose of identifying candidates as Clones. Mark Twain was a major celebrity of his time, he had acquired the highest level of national fame and a veneration which even spread outside of American borders. Also his physiognomy embodies a number of aesthetic cues which were characteristic of the times, when it comes to clothing style, facial hair and general demeanor, causing other people to bear sometimes a strong resemblance to him, partially thanks to a few similar features and also, more importantly, to stylistic cues and bearing which were quite similar to his. This exercise may help Boy Monkey to better see what makes a Clone a Clone and a Lookalike a Lookalike. He should of course accept, for the purpose of discussion, that much of this is conjecture even if announced in an assertive way when I believe it to be very plausible. As always, I claim to have no direct evidence of anyone being a Clone, only strong suspicions that they might be.



Steeler64

now to keep reading . All this cloning stuff is a missing piece in the deception puzzle for my research ...thanks and cheers




Steeler64, I hope you keep us in the loop with any progress in your research, or share by PM concerns about any areas where you may get blocked, due to too many missing pieces in the puzzle. Conspiracy forums can in fact help cross reference ideas and cross pollinate hypotheses in order to figure out complex problem sets which we have too small a factual sample to collect sufficient data or insufficient references to use in validating competing theories.


Cheers,


Getsmart



posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 12:38 AM
link   
PHOTO ACCESS OBSERVATIONS

Dear Friends, this short note is in apology for Photos not appearing in this thread due to bandwidth limitations. Please note that if my bandwidth is not sufficient, it is due to Photobucket placing limits and not allowing ANONYMOUS payment to expand this bandwidth. Unfortunately there is no way to ensure continuous display of posted images when they restrict access.

I shall however, try to minimize this effect by posting future photos to other accounts, reducing the impact of their bandwidth restrictions. You again have my apologies for any inconvenience this may cause.

Also, it is customary for such services to re-initialize access to photos on the 1st of the month. Therefore the earlier each month you choose to look at a thread using photobucket or a similar service, the greater your chance of seeing the images posted. I invite you to try on the 1st of next month to reaccess this and other threads presenting similar a inconvenience.

Cheers,

Getsmart



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 03:23 AM
link   
Hi Steeler64,


Although with a delay, I shall honor your request and address the issue of doubles who are look-alikes and indeed not Clones.


You mentioned the case of Mark Twain who was many times mistaken for other influential people of his time who bore a passing resemblance to him, considered by some to be in fact a striking resemblance. Let us consider what features may have stimulated such a response and what distinguishes these men so that we can safely ascertain that they simply bore a resemblance rather than were potential candidates as Clones of some other party unknown.


CASES OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY:
MARK TWAIN AND HIS LOOKALIKES
Same Hair, Different Brains



For starters, let us examine the subtitle of this article: Same hair, different brains. This was taken from the memoirs of Mark Twain, and refers to one such event. However, we can note that most often the cases of mistaken identity to which he was subject were often due to a "Similarity in disguise" respective to characteristic facial hair and "mane" versus an exact correspondence of features. One by one we can eliminate each candidate from being an exact biological replica of Mark Twain.


1. In the example of Theodor Mommsen, upon which that comment was based, it is clear that his facial features only bear a remote resemblance to those of Mark Twain, and had he not had a wild head of white hair, few if any may have noted any sort of resemblance whatsoever between the two men. We are in presence of a similar phenomenon to wearing a Groucho Marx pair of glasses with a plastic nose. Most folks will think that with those two small elements of disguise, placed toward the center of your face, that you will look just like Groucho, even if you are a 5 foot tall 20 year old woman. Strongly typified characteristics tend to blind our eyes to many other features which distinguish people from one another.

2. Antonio Borzi does bear in the photo comparison shown of the two men a strong resemblance to Mark Twain, yet I was unable to locate photos from other angles for comparison purposes. One reserve is that even from the profile shown, it appears that they do not have the same forward elongation of the facial mask, and that Borzi's chin is more in retreat than that of Mark Twain. This persona would need further identification for a formal match. One element presents a risk, that of similar facial hair and hairstyle, which tend to mask feature difference which would otherwise appear to be salient.

3. Frank Moulton has narrower eyes than Mark Twain, but more importantly his face takes up more surface on his head in proportion to its overall size. These two key differences preclude him sharing the same DNA as Mark Twain but merely growing to a taller height.

4. Gaspar Clemens bears more than a passing resemblance with Mark Twain, even if he was shown here in a photograph while Mark Twain is shown in an engraving. That his name is quite close to the real name of Mark Twain, Samual Clemens, is of further interest. This does imply that there could be a similarity in genetic heritage by virtue of being close or distant cousins. In any case this is the nearest look-alike of the bunch. That they might be naturally related genetically with "similar DNA" reduces the likelihood of them potentially having identical DNA.

5. The dentist Dr. Joseph Jay Villers is another very interesting case to study. We will note among all of these candidates as look-alikes of Mark Twain, that many do appear to look like him by virtue of similar features and especially the more salient ones, such as his hairstyle and mustache. However, there is another key characteristic of physical appearance, which is one's bearing, the way one carries oneself and expresses oneself in body language and speech. This is a key area of investigation for impersonators, who learn to mimic facial expressions, mannerisms and speech patterns. The move and act like the original character, something this person apparently did rather well in the case of Mark Twain. I ask you to however examine the poster which is presented, and look carefully at the other people whom this imitator has mimicked, they are represented there too. In few of those other images does he look like Mark Twain.

6. Ambrose Bierce is a different case, because he does not share the same hairstyle as Mark Twain. However, he does share the mustache, which frames the face in a similar manner, and his features do resemble those of Mark Twain - even in their proportion to the size of the skull. Let us remember also that Mark Twain was among the very rare celebrities of his day whose image was widely diffused around the world, making his likeness something which only required a reminder for his image to be awakened in people's minds. Hence the amusing anecdote used by the Mayor of Seattle that Mark Twain looked like him, and not the reverse. Again, we must be cautious and examine each individual at other ages and photographed or painted at other angles, in order to better ascertain their features and general physiognomy. Here is a photograph of him which looks nothing like Mark Twain.



7. Supreme Court Chief Justice Melville Fuller is a far easier look-alike to quickly dismiss, given that his feature set is both taller and broader, taking up much of the surface of his head, unlike Mark Twain whose features barely cover half the surface of the front of the cranium.

8. James Hugh Keeley is an interesting case of stylistic modeling, whereby he seems to have clearly modeled his own appearance after that of Mark Twain. It may have struck his vanity to have crowds following him and being called the "double" of a world famous Great Man? In any case he reportedly did not mind the attention and kept the components of his Mark Twain "disguise" unchanged. In the photo comparison his head is thinner and narrower, making him a very unlikely candidate, if seen in direct side-by-side comparison.

9. In the case of Ignace Jan Paderewski we can note once again the presence of a mustache and wild out of control hair. This is a common aspect of seeming to look like Mark Twain. However, all of his features are in proportion larger with respect to his head size, his nose being larger yet. His jawline is a bit weaker also, being less squared and his cheekbones are slightly less salient.

10. While Frederick Augustus Lucas might has similar features when each is examined independently, his facial geometry is different from that of Mark Twain, making them not look at all alike when compared in presence of one another. Furthermore his features are slightly larger on the skull than those of Mark Twain.

11. Thomas J. Humes has an almost identical mustache and hairstyle to Mark Twain, yet his features only bear a mild resemblance. His match regarding pilosity is near perfect, making it easy to forget the other features and imagine he is a look-a-like. Most of his features are however quite different.

12. Robert Hope-Jones has two things which bring him to look like Mark Twain. For one he knew him and had a special rapport with him, meaning that he could in fact emulate him quite well by wearing similar style of hair and mustache as well as adopting a similar bearing and expressions. Also, his features are not so different that the combination can evoke Mark Twain.



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 03:33 AM
link   
... CONTINUED


13. Albert Schweitzer has features which are far more salient than those of Mark Twain, occupying far more surface on his cranium. Hence he might have had at a given time a slight resemblance to the author, but cannot be construed as a double.

14. In the case of Albert Einstein we again find ourselves in presence of an individual with a large mustache and wild uncontrolled white hair. Is this all that people notice about how others look? One might wonder... In any case, without proceeding with a meticulous distinction feature by feature or examining in detail facial geometry, we can note that his features take up a great deal more surface on his skull, making him a most unlikely candidate.

15. The unknown newspaper man is another person who doesn't match Mark Twain, if for nothing else, because his general head shape is more elliptical than Samuel Clemens' squarish head. Amusingly, though with bushy hair, he does not sport a mustache.

I hope these clarifications help members better distinguish between mere similarities and key bone morphology, facial geometry and feature identity in order to better establish whether a person is a Clone or merely somebody who happens to very partially look like another person.

Getsmart



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Canadian dentist hopes to clone John Lennon with rotten molar

Forward-thinking Beatles fan Michael Zuk bought the tooth for a mere $30,000, and now he wants to give his rock idol a second chance at life. ‘


Read more: www.nydailynews.com...

Great - not only will Faul be running around, but Fohn, too



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 06:36 PM
link   
It certainly looks like they are trying to get people to accept Cloning VIPs. Anyone who becomes a LEGEND should be worthy of Cloning. Soon it will be an honor to be Cloned, with people lining up and asking if they can be sampled and replicated. The ultimate cool will be to have an armada of your lookalikes marching about on all continents. For isn't Imitation the highest form of Flattery?

Getsmart



posted on Dec, 9 2013 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Getsmart
 


Hillo Getsmart,

You know what's funny? I'm always sayin', "Someone please clone me!" ha ha Sometimes it feels like I'm being stretched, so much to do! It would be nice to have more than one me. I agree, one day it will be not only acceptable but desirable to be cloned. And who better to start with then people in the public eye? The masses are slow to accept certain ideas so if we regularly see, hear, touch, taste and smell clones on Tv and in night clubs, it's easier for the public to swallow, adapt to and desire.

BTW, I'm a big fan of yours. I read your posts a lot.


Happy Holidays,

Toni



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 06:45 PM
link   
18 Celebrities And Their Historical Doppelgangers

www.businessinsider.com...



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 05:00 AM
link   
not only was donald marshall a mixed up unit, the show he was on is also very suspect
it seems we're on our own in all this

the Robert Downey Jr. clone's ear lobes are different
i lol'd at the clown drawings
/imagines handing an IOU to a bus driver

..have you heard the Clint Richardson 'total geneological emmersion.mp3' research presentation? (sic)

"send in the clones..."
"send in the clones..."
"they're...already... hereeeeeeee!!!"


what do you think of;
phillip seymour hoffman connection to kiefer sutherland?
kelsey grammar connection to bob hope? (it's some black & white era lousy comedian)

i keep seeing celebrities and confusing them for a split-second kinda thing.. you know what i mean? ..like i'll see kylie minogue or one of 'em all done up w/ makeup and i'll be like, "uhh, is that so and so?" (then i have to go in for a second look)
(i like using the world 'like' today)
when i first got here at ATS, i made a post about trans-humanism (mentioning jolie and gaga)
in that post i refer to them as "phase one(s)" ..that's what i think of them as, all these one that look SIMILAR but are not the same.. they're meant to help sell products.. i know the phase two's will be used to sell us "lifestyles" (again, they're already hereeeee)
edit on 1-3-2014 by UNIT76 because: there is certainly some weird # going on here





new topics
 
37
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join