Ray Kurzweil’s plan for immortality is missing one thing: you

Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpresscom
Jon Rappoport
March 24, 2017

In a Wired interview (11/18/02), leading transhumanist and Google’s director of engineering, Ray Kurzweil, spoke about living forever. He was asked: “Will you have your entire body preserved or just your head?”

The usual method of preservation, upon physical death, is freezing. Then, when the technology exists, sometime later, there would be the unfreezing and the reanimation. The dead person would come back to life…

Kurzweil said: “I think there’s some part of our identity and valuable information in our bodies. There’s more in our brains, but there’s some in our bodies as well. It gets into some technical issues. There’s a better way of preserving the brain, which they haven’t been able to do with the whole body yet. The vitrification process, which does a better job of preserving structural integrity in the cells, they do with the head but not with the body. At any rate, I’d go for the grade A plan.”

Kurzweil would apparently have his brain and body preserved, for future reanimation.

There is, of course, an underlying question:

What about consciousness?

Assuming the technology will exist to “bring back” the body and the brain, will the consciousness of being alive exist? Or will the process reinstitute something entirely mechanical?

Mechanical, as in: “The car was sitting in the garage on blocks for 50 years, and then we fixed it and made it start again.”

Biologists and physicists are bothered by the “consciousness question.” When they discuss it, they assume the brain produces consciousness because, well, where else could awareness come from? In other words, they resort to unscientific circular reasoning.

At the same time, they assert that the basis for all matter and energy in the universe is tiny particles; none of those particles have consciousness; and the particles make up the brain; the brain is composed entirely of those non-conscious particles.

This is called a trap. Hard scientists have no reason to assume consciousness exists at all. Yet it does exist. That implies consciousness is coming from somewhere other than the brain, somewhere other than particles—but according to these scientists, that “other somewhere” doesn’t exist.

So they retreat back into “consciousness is in the brain”—even though by their own science, it isn’t.

Preserving body and brain in a state of suspended animation, and then bringing it back, would not, according to a proper reading of their own science, bring back consciousness.

What would come back is some sort of mechanical functioning, and nothing else.

A conscious Ray Kurzweil would never come back.

His body and brain might hum again, like an old car that was fixed, but that’s all.

People continue to argue, of course, that in some very complex way the brain causes consciousness, we just don’t know how yet, but we’re getting there. That’s not evidence. That’s a naked assumption. They may as well be saying the moon is surely made of cheese and one day we’ll prove it, so for now just accept it.

“Well, folks, we just brought back Ray Kurzweil from fifty years of suspended animation. Remember him? He was a futurist at Google, or the CIA, it’s hard to tell which. Apparently the two organizations were one. Anyway, Ray is back.”

“Wonderful. Is he talking?”

“There is brain activity. No talking yet.”

“Is he looking at anything?”

“We assume so. His eyes are open. Also, his hands are opening and closing.”

“Is he gesturing?”

“It’s theoretically possible.”

“Is he conscious?”

“Of course. There is brain activity.”

“Well, there could be brain activity without consciousness.”

“Where did you pick up that idea? Are you crazy? He’s conscious. That’s all there is to it.”

“Maybe there is no ‘he’. There are just electrical signals.”

“Idiot. Life is electrical signals. What else could life be?”

“Life could be conscious, as in ‘hello I’m alive and I’d like to take a walk and look at the clouds and read a book and here’s an interesting passage on page ten, let’s discuss it’.”

“What’s your name again? Guards, take this man to the re-education center. He’s lost his basic programming…”

Ray, your reanimated brain and body aren’t going to bring back conscious-you. (You might reincarnate in a quite different way, but that’s a different story for another time…)

But don’t despair. In the future, when there are 10,000 brains and bodies in a warehouse, and technology allows them to be reactivated, they might, combined, generate enough electricity to run, say, a toaster, a refrigerator, and an oven in a micro apartment in San Francisco.

More at: JonRappoport.wordpresscom

Of Stem Cells & Resurrections…Some Thorny Questions

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
March 23, 2017

By now most readers of this website are familiar with the plans of the transhumanists to download and upload human personalities, or rather, their memories, to computers and then to upload those into “clones” to achieve a kind of immortality, a process my co-author Scott D DeHart and I outlined in our book Transhumanism: A Grimoire of Alchemical Agendas. As we argued briefly in that book, there were two fundamental assumptions at work behind this: the first was that memories were located in the brain exclusively, and were therefore nothing more than certain physical-chemical relationships that constitute the “memories” and that these were transferable. Personality was, in short, based on materialist assumptions. The second assumption is a more subtle and indeed metaphysical and theological one, and one more or less implicit to Western culture, even to the atheist, though many would not know it: that assumption is that soul and person are the same things.

The debate just changed, and rather dramatically, for now there is open acknowledgement of the actual scientific attempt to resurrect individuals, as the following article shared by Mr. V.T. indicates:

Resurrecting Dead People Using Stem Cells Given The Green Light

The essence is what one might expect, another corporate grab for power, even over the issue of death and personhood itself:

Scientists are getting ethical permission from health watchdogs to resurrect dead people by using a combination of regeneration therapies. Starting this year, the groundbreaking Project Reanima will primarily use stem cells to stimulate the regrowth of neurons in clinically dead patients. Bioquark Inc., an American biotech company, is one of medical companies given the green light to conduct the trials on 20 brain dead patients from traumatic injuries.

Leading the team is Dr Himanshu Bansal, Indian specialist who works with Biotech companies Revita Life Sciences and Bioquark Inc,. The team will use a combination of therapies, which include injecting the brain with stem cells and a cocktail of peptides, as well as deploying lasers and nerve stimulation techniques. The procedure has been shown to bring patients out of comas.

The resurrection technique using stem cells will test whether parts of the dead patients’ central nervous system can be brought back to life. Scientists believe that the brain stem cells may be able to erase their history and re-start life again based on their surrounding tissue. The process is similar to that in creatures like salamanders who can regrow entire limbs. (Emphasis added)

There is some suggestive corroborative news that would seem to rationalize the process, according to this article shared by Mr. T.M.:

Doctors record ‘unexplained’ brain activity ten minutes after patient died

What’s intriguing in the latter article is that there is no explanation for brainwave activity continuing after clinical death, and particularly, the loss of oxygen and circulation from the heart:

Is there life after death? Science can’t yet answer that question – but doctors in a Canadian intensive care unit say that a patient showed ‘persistent’ brain activity after death.

The activity was detected 10 minutes after the patient was certified dead.

Doctors had confirmed death by the absence of a pulse, and a lack of reaction in the pupils – but the patient still appeared to have ‘delta wave bursts’, similar to what happens in sleep.

The researchers admit that there is no biological explanation for how brain activity could continue several minutes after the heart has stopped beating, according to Science Alert.

The scientific study of life, in some form or fashion, after death has been a small but growing field for many decades. But I am going to suggest that these two articles must be taken together, for it is that “taking together” that forms the basis of today’s high octane speculation. Pose this question: What motivations might be behind the attempt to “resurrect” the neurons, and hence, brain function, of long dead people, beyond the obvious ones of attempting a “resurrection” at all? If one speculates a bit about the second article, what it might suggest is something that I personally have long thought, namely, that the mind and the brain are two different things, and that the former is something like a non-local, and hence, ultimately non-material phenomenon, and that the latter functions like a radio receiver of sorts, tuning it is, or transducing it into this material existence. This runs counter to neat schemes of Cartesian dualism or even epiphenomenalism. It could indeed be that the creation of a unique brain by human reproduction brings into existence an information matrix – the mind with all its non-locality – that was not there previously. It would be akin to an ancient Christian doctrine called “traducianism” (a doctrine which, incidentally, many believe to be a heresy and which was viewed that way by the medieval Western Church).

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Biological Nanobot Responds To DNA Signals: New Meaning To…


Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
March 15, 2017

Nanotechnology has taken another significant step in the technology tree to becoming a reality for medicinal (and other) purposes, according to this article shared by Mr. V.K.:

Shape-shifting molecular robots respond to DNA signals

Note some intriguing things here, from the beginning of the article:

A research group at Tohoku University and Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology has developed a molecular robot consisting of biomolecules, such as DNA and protein. The molecular robot was developed by integrating molecular machines into an artificial cell membrane. It can start and stop its shape-changing function in response to a specific DNA signal.

This is the first time that a molecular robotic system has been able to recognize signals and control its shape-changing function. What this means is that molecular robots could, in the near future, function in a way similar to living organisms.

According to the article, this little nano-bot is only one millionth of a meter in diameter. This may seem significant, until one recalls in his 1986 nanotechnology classic, Engines of Creation, Eric Drexler noted that IBM had been successful in spelling its name with 35 xenon atoms, and, even more breathtakingly, AT&T had constructed the first artificial atom. That was in 1986!

But to return to the article, why is a shape-changing nanobot significant? The answer:

The realization of a molecular robot whose components are designed at a molecular level and who can function in a small and complicated environment, such as the human body, is expected to significantly expand the possibilities of robotics engineering. The results of this study could lead to technological developments that could help solve important medical issues — such as a treatment robot for live culturing cells and a monitoring robot for checking environmental pollution.

“The paper by Nomura and coworkers represents a major step towards the development of autonomous soft microrobots,” says Dr. Friedrich Simmel, professor at the Technische Universität München. “Based on this achievement, in the future similar systems could be developed that display artificial phototaxis or chemotaxis, or similar ‘intelligent’ behavior.”

Indulging in a bit of high octane speculation, one can envision that such technologies could be made to change shape and latch onto various pathogens, which have their own peculiar shapes that some believe allows then to attack human cells; AIDS and cancer cells could thus, by the DNA signals that they give, attract such nanobots which could then attach themselves to the disease cells and literally attack them, injecting them with terminal drugs. In short, a major step in the technology tree has been taken, proven, and the door is open to modifications of the basic technology that would conceivably usher in a very new and very different kind of chemotherapy.

And of course, if one indulges high octane speculation a little further, this is the ultimate biological weapons possibility, for programmable nanobots could conceivably be designed to attack only certain kinds of genetic signatures. One might go so far as to envision such technologies that could be injected into a target population and activated at a later date by the introduction of chemical triggering agents or electromagnetic signaling, giving a new, literal, and terrifying meaning to the term “sleeper cells.”

And if we can think of it, one can rest assured “they” have as well. In this respect, it’s worth recalling once again what my co-author Scott deHart and I wrote in Transhumanism: A Grimoire of Alchemical Agendas, for we pointed out there that a key area of research for DARPA, the Defense Advance Projects Research Agency, or as we like to call it following a suggestion of Mr. J.B., the Diabolically Apocalyptic Research Projects Agency, is nanotechnology.

…and with enough black funds, and people, and time…

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Robots With Human Skin…And Oh, Look, A 3-D Printer That Can Do…

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
March 12, 2017

Yesterday, you’ll recall, I blogged about a little house that was built in Russia, on the spot, using 3-d printing or “additive manufacturing,” for a little over $10,000. And in recent years we’ve also occasionally covered stories about the use of the technology to print various biological components: organs and so on.

Well, many readers of this website noticed a significant story that was reported just this past January, of the latest application of the technology to “print” human organs, in this case, skin:

Spanish scientists create 3D bioprinter which can print functional human skin

Now, there’s a disturbing passage here:

It may be the biggest human organ, but it’s about to become a lot less finite.

That’s because scientists in Spain have developed a prototype for a 3D bioprinter that is capable of producing totally functional human skin.

The skin can be used for research purposes, testing cosmetics and other chemical-based products, and for transplanting onto human patients.

“(It) can be transplanted to patients or used in business settings to test chemical products, cosmetics or pharmaceutical products in quantities and with timetables and prices that are compatible with these uses,” said José Luis Jorcano, one of the researchers behind the project. (Emphasis added)

Note the now-familiar tactic whenever such technologies are being advanced and “sold” to the public, the good old  “think of the health benefits” argument. Well, true enough, such skin would be a convenient test bed for testing pharmaceutical products and cosmetics, and this is sure to have the animal rights’ advocacy community’s attention, for currently, as is well known, animals are use as test subjects for cosmetic products and so on, and as a result, suffer. Getting rid of that would be good. However, it does not take a great leap of the imagination nor much “high octane speculation” to realize that such printed organs could also be convenient test beds for other purposes, such as the testing of skin-absorbed bio-weapons, and so on.

However, my real concern today is the connection between this story and the following story that many people also shared:

Get ready for robots with human flesh

And in case you missed that important paragraph, here it is:

Two University of Oxford biomedical researchers are calling for robots to be built with real human tissue, and they say the technology is there if we only choose to develop it. Writing in Science Robotics, Pierre-Alexis Mouthuy and Andrew Carr argue that humanoid robots could be the exact tool we need to create muscle and tendon grafts that actually work.(Italicized emphasis added).

Now ponder that statement in connection with the first article, for if it is now possible to 3-d print human skin, then the possibility of 3-d printing specific human musculature is not far behind, and with that, the “human looking robot.” Forget about the humanoid robots of I, Robot of Isaac Asimov’s celebrated sci-fi classic or the movie with Will Smith, or C3PO of the Star Wars series with its definitely mechanical robots and “droids”. In effect, the robots would increasingly look human, more like the “androids” of the Alien series of movies.

And since we were talking yesterday about the decline of labor productivity, why even bother hiring expensive actors (like Will Smith) at all, when one could design a robot with a certain “look”? Why hire expensive performers for a rock band or symphony orchestra when one could simply create a whole orchestra of robots, which, incidentally, wouldn’t make “mistakes”?

Asimov foresaw it all in I, Robot, and one can only hope that the same people who are pushing the “androidization” of human society will also be giving some thought to the three fundamental rules of robotics that Asimov also wrote about.

And it’s worth mentioning that things didn’t go so smoothly, in spite of the best of intentions and the three rules of robotics, in Asimov’s “fiction,” which, unfortunately, looks more like it is becoming science fact.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Towards The Electronic DNA Switch

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
March 4, 2017

A few weeks ago, you might recall, I blogged about the latest diabolical gimick being cooked up in the bubbling cauldrons of Muck Pharmaceuticals, our euphemistic code name for Big Pharma. What was the gimick? Vaccines that literally modified a person’s sneeze with more of the same muck. The plan is relatively simple: (1) take a vaccine, (2) sneeze, and (3) thereby spread the vaccine to other people, who may not even want it. Add this to the arm’s length long list of other technologies – nano-technology, genetic engineering, CRISPR and so on – and one has a veritable witches brew of all manner of mischief. Then of course, we have the lunacy of the transhumanists who want to chip everyone (hmmm, that sounds vaguely familiar), and put computer-brain interfaces inside you and everyone will be happy and there will be population control and world peace. Think of it as “the electronic LSD trip”.

The hang up of course, has been that pesky stuff called DNA.

Until now, for according to this article kindly shared by Mr. M.B., scientists at the university of Arizona have come up with… well, read for yourself:

Scientists Create Active Controllable Electronic DNA Switch

DNA has unique electrical properties that have for years interested pioneering engineers trying to advance the development of tiny, low-cost electronic devices. Now, a research team led by scientists at Arizona State University (ASU) have developed the first controllable DNA switch to regulate the flow of electricity within a single, atomic-sized molecule—much like flipping your light switch at home, only on a scale 1000 times smaller than a human hair.

“It has been established that charge transport is possible in DNA, but for a useful device one wants to be able to turn the charge transport on and off. We achieved this goal by chemically modifying DNA,” explained senior study investigator Nongjian Tao, Ph.D., professor of electrical engineering and director of the Center for Biosensors and Bioelectronics within the Biodesign Institute at ASU. “Not only that, but we can also adapt the modified DNA as a probe to measure reactions at the single-molecule level. This provides a unique way for studying important reactions implicated in disease, or photosynthesis reactions for novel renewable energy applications.”

There’s another statement that’s important here, a little further in the article:

To accomplish their goal, the investigators modified just one of the double-stranded DNA’s standard bases (A, T, C, or G) with another chemical group, called anthraquinone (Aq). Anthraquinone is a three-ringed carbon structure that can be inserted in between DNA base pairs but contains what chemists call a redox group (short for reduction, or gaining electrons, and oxidation, losing electrons).

Why is this statement important? Because it opens the door to how this new ability will be “sold” to the public: “Why, it will potentially help us be able to combat or even cure diseases with a known or suspected link to oxidation problems, cancer for example. Why, potentially, one might even be able to use the technique to repair or remake neural pathways. It’s hard to tell where this might go, we’re just beginning.” Now lest my usual trademark high octane speculation here might seem a bit over-the-top, it should be pointed out that in the very next sentence, the technique of how this will be “sold” to the public is clearly implicated:

Redox groups are also the foundation for how our bodies'(sic) convert chemical energy through switches that send all of the electrical pulses in our brains and hearts and communicate signals within every cell that may be implicated in the most prevalent diseases.
(Emphasis added)

Of course, the flip side of this switch is that if this technology impinges upon the switches “that send all of the electrical pulses in our brains and hearts” then it also has the potential to be that proverbial “kill switch” I and others have been warning about for a while.

Add this technology to the “sneeze vaccine” and voila, one has a pretty handy tool for all sorts of mischief.

So while Muck Pharmaceuticals may run commercials about this new wonder cure, also remember the darker potentials…

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Rappaport On DNA-Altering Vaccines: My High Octane Speculations…

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
February 26, 2017

I am increasingly alarmed at the amount of power people are willing to surrender to big corporations, and to the GMO-pharmaceutical complex. Over the years I’ve been attempting to alert people not only to the dangers of these products, but more importantly, to the dangers of the mercantilist policies and corporate-government linkage that has been erected to protect them. Recently, one commentator on one of my blogs on this subject pointed out that one of my blogs contained an error: I had maintained a speculative scenario in which big pharma could be sued. The individual pointed out that vaccine makers cannot be sued under current law. Well, to be frank, I knew that, though I was not clear about that in my blog. But the commentator raised the point I was trying to make anyway: such a policy enshrined as a “law” is another case of the same mercantilism at work; and in the absence of the protection of law, and without recourse in complaints before the courts, pharmaceutical companies can, in effect, put whatever they please into their vaccines (and it appears they’ve been doing just that), and turn entire populations into their lab rats. They then control the discussion through control of journals and paid-for “science”, and work to mandate vaccinations in the general population.

The question is why? What’s the purpose, beyond keeping people sick and selling pharmaceutical “cures” to problems which they very well may have created (think of the vaccines-autism link)? Many would argue it’s because vaccines are viewed as a surreptitious way of enforcing population control, and indeed, there are some suggestive statements from vaccine advocates to this effect:

4 times Bill Gates said vaccines would reduce world population

It’s hard to follow Mr. Gates’ logic here: he seems, on the one hand, to be genuinely concerned to reduce childhood mortality from illnesses via vaccinations, but at the same time is heard advocating “reproductive health services,” a convenient euphemism for you-know-what, and is also heard implying that this will cut down on population growth. To be sure, in areas where infant and childhood mortality is high, people tend to have more children. And this appears to be Mr. Gates’ real point, taken out of context in the video clips. Nonetheless, when billionaire busybodies smile reassuringly, I tend to shudder, for like it or not, he does couple vaccination with population reduction.  In any case, I use these remarks merely to illustrate what many out there believe the real covert agenda to be: population control and reduction through vaccination, and that implies covert ingredients to do just that. Another theory is that vaccines are being used as a wealth-harvesting mechanism: make people sick – with autism for example – and then harvest that family’s wealth thereafter by selling the expensive drugs that “treat” the condition.

However, there may be yet another agenda, suggested to me for today’s high octane speculation by the following article by Mr. Jon Rappaport, and shared by Mr. S.F.:

ALERT: New vaccines will permanently alter your DNA

Mr. Rappaport states something quite profound, and quite disturbing:

“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”

“’The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”

“The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.” [That was nearly two years ago.]

“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”

Here is the punchline: “The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”

Read that again: “the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA.”

Alteration of the human genetic makeup.

Not just a “visit.” Permanent residence. And once a person’s DNA is changed, doesn’t it follow that he/she will pass on that change to the next generation of children, and so on, down the line? (Emphases added)

So where’s my high octane speculation? In my book Genes, Giants, Monsters and Men I pointed out that the prospect of genetic engineering and the current legal practice literally allows corporations to own their genetic patents. I argued that, because of this, it is conceivable that someone receiving or experiencing a genetic modification to their DNA via one of these patented programs could, conceivably, end up having to pay for the privilege of such modification by becoming a permanent rentier of the modification, paying, in effect, a royalty or license fee to the company that owned the patent on it, for as long as that person exhibited the modification, and potentially for the rest of their lives. Think of it as the genetic version of what the GMO companies have managed to do with their seeds. Add to this the possibility that this modification could be passed to their children, and one gets the idea. A massive system of serfdom and wealth-harvesting could be introduced via gene-altering vaccines. Such a draconian system would, in effect, make everyone vassals to the company for their modifications; indeed, it is conceivable that so long as their DNA alterations exhibit the patented modifications, that they in effect become the property of the patent-holder.

Call it: “Slavery through genetic modification via vaccines.”

As Mr. Rappaport says at the end of his article:

If you’re going to alter humans, for example, to make many of them more docile and weak, and some of them stronger, in order to restructure society, you want everyone under the umbrella. No exceptions. No exemptions.

The freedom and the right to refuse vaccines has always been vital. It is more vital than ever now.

And I would argue, that the sinister toad squatting in the middle of all of this is precisely current patent law, and what that might imply for the long-term goals of billionaire busybodies and their vaccine advocacy: it’s another way of “perfecting slavery collateral” in reducing everyone to feudal vassals, and increasing their own wealth. But this is all high octane speculation, to be sure. We’ll know if it’s true if, in fact, these billionaire busybodies and pharmaceutical companies start talking about “individual health care savings accounts” – which will be mandated of course – to pay for long term medical care and fees, which would cover payments of permanent royalty fees for the privilege of having one’s DNA modified by (mandated) vaccines.

What’s next to roll off the assembly line of designer drugs, therapies, and humans? Watch for it: cannibalism: in the form of stem cells being included in vaccines. And while we’re at it, let’s make them oral vaccines, just for good measure.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.