0 21 2020.11.20 2022.05.07 2022.05.08 Amenoum On the nature of extinctions. biology extinction, transformation, neurogenesis, cancer, cure https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5248325 /authors/Amenoum.html#credits Extinction as a cure Abstract Possible cures for planetary cancer are presented, discussed, and hypothesized as likely requirement for successful neurogenesis. Intro So far, I have established that major extinctions are relative - life does not get extinct, rather transformed and transferred to another place, in the process of neurogenesis. However, in case of cancerous surface life, it probably has to be cured prior to migration.
Road to hell
Fig. 1: Rapid transit to Sheol
Depolarization Previously, I have assumed that cancerous personalities are eliminated, either prior to, or with, transformation through accelerated evolution. However, probability that transformation will cure cancerous nature depends on polarization of fusing lifeforms. In case cancerous nature is not healed, depolarization will likely be achieved through extinction. Here, human society effectively divides into non-cancerous (neutral) and cancerous (polarized) population. Without neutrality, cancerous individuals would then annihilate and go extinct.
Note that no extinction is absolute, so, even here, souls are preserved but they incarnate into wild (neutral) bodies. Co-evolution of a polarized soul with a neutral body will result in a less polarized hybrid, thus subduing cancerous tendencies. If these are further energetically constrained, they will be benign.
With cycles of reincarnation these souls would then be integrating into growing neutral human society as neutral individuals. On the other hand, if population does not separate, due to polarized individuals being a majority, this will certainly lead to destruction of all life and death of the planet - unless nature (immune system of the planet) does have some other cure to cancer and will react to specifically target cancerous individuals (ie. through viral mechanics and/or introduction of intra-terrestrial lifeforms that prey on humans). Most likely, such mechanisms do exist in a planet (COVID-19 is then likely a precursor to more specialized viruses), it is only a question in what measure they will be exercised and how precise will the targeting be - after all, difference between a good and bad (cancerous) human is, like in case of TGF-β proteins in humans, more mental than physical. In case of viral mechanics, DNA could have a role in this [natural] selection, while, in case of predators, fear is likely a strong factor. In any case, synchronicity should have a strong role.
A malignant tumour in human bodies usually goes undetected until the number of cells in it has doubled at least 30 times from a single cell. Human population on Earth has already doubled 32 times, reaching 4.3 billion in 1978. According to current growth projections, 33rd doubling should be reached ≈2029. Reactions to cancer on Earth at this point should thus not be surprising and I would not be surprised if 33rd doubling would also be the peak of human population. Human population has reached 230 sometime between 1830 - 1840. This it the time when Chinese Empire was forced to open its frontiers to western exploitation and when Industrial Revolution could be fully felt. The Industrial Revolution has been criticised for complete ecological collapse, causing mental illness, pollution and unnatural systems of organizing for humanity. Since the start of the industrial revolution people have criticised it by stating the Industrial Revolution turned humanity and nature into slaves and destroying the world. It has also been criticised by valuing profits and corporate growth over life and well-being, multiple movements have arose philosophically against the Industrial Revolution and include groups such as the Amish and Primitivism. So, it seems the cancer indeed becomes noticed at 230 population size, correlated with its industrial revolution.
Therefore, separation is probably a less painful solution.
Fig. 2: Relative prophecy
Fig. 2 could be showing rebuilding of [neutral] population that would stay on the current planet, rather than migrating to another as I have hypothesized elsewhere. However, both could be true (superposition). Horizontal transfer and transformation = extermination Similar to a major extinction being a synonym for vertical transfer and transformation of life, horizontal transformation and transfer is also possible. Current extermination of wild life on Earth's surface is thus only relative extermination, as souls of these creatures cannot be destroyed, some of these may be transferred to distant worlds, but proportionally to decrease in wildlife population these souls will increasingly be coupling with bodies of humans and other domesticated animals. Probability for expression of wild personality will thus grow in domesticated species (incl. humans). This may be interpreted as a self-correcting mechanism, raising intelligence/awareness (wild souls are generally non-polarized) in destructive species to prevent further destruction of wild habitats and generally wild (free) species. However, major extermination is generally a precursor to major extinction, thus, rise in awareness among cancerous species will likely require extinction to be reflected in rise of consciousness. Added chapter Programmed disease. Programmed disease It is well known that embryogenesis is very similar to carcinogenesis. If Earth is in the embryonic stage of development (as I hypothesize), the development of cancer on surface may be programmed. Any complex organism is formed with the fossilization of symbiosis of multiple organisms into genetic code of a new organism. In this process of evolution even a disease could be used to advance the development of a being. The fact is, we are all born with viruses and diseases (some are part of DNA), they are just normally not a problem, they're either not expressed or they're subdued by the immune system, at least until old age or until the system is weakened. Now consider that Earth needs significantly increased CO2 for its development at times (as ancient history suggests). Rather than using volcanoes from the start, perhaps it would be better to let disease develop and produce it. This is a perfect solution if development of this disease can be halted before it becomes too dangerous. It's even better if this disease is suicidal and halts itself. The evidence suggests evolution of life (including human evolution) is locally programmed (even though one cannot see the physical code). There are examples of inverted causality where life seems to have been adapted to increase in CO2 even before it happened. This strongly suggests that increased CO2 is simply part of the programming. Increases of atmospheric CO2 are correlated with major extinctions (which should also be programmed) and a major extinction is happening now too. Therefore, I find it unlikely that human domination on surface and anthropogenic CO2 emissions are an unplanned excursion, rather, it is a normal part of genetic expression in planets like Earth. If that is so, and humans do not produce as much CO2 (or greenhouse gases) as needed, one can expect increases in volcanism and other natural greenhouse gas emissions - even as anthropogenic CO2 emissions decrease. Indeed, evidence suggests this might already be happening. This does not mean we should continue drilling for oil and increase pumping of greenhouse gases - it would be better to leave that to Earth if more of it is indeed needed, otherwise it could become fatal for everyone (if it is not fatal now). After all, we do not know how much is needed and we obviously have trouble controlling ourselves. Disease out of control should not be something we want - even if we are the disease. Article updated. Article revised.