Letters to the Editor


Thank you Frank and Jo Ann for Southern Cross this month!!


Reflections on the Human Genome Project   

Craig Holdrege and Johannes Wirz


This great stuff is at least of interest at least to me. You guys are great. In the article it describes how the human being seems to contain a mere 30,000 genes. Plants up to 25,000 genes.. Now here is what I want to  suggest. We know the old adage that, "If the eye were not sunlike how could it see?" But let me drift here for a second.


In the plant we have photosynthesis in every leaf. You can watch the Leaf collect light and follow the sun in their leaf cells. There are lens in the leaf cells and they digest light. Insects and the eyes of insects, many of them reveal the Hexagonal 6 sides. Now if we go downwards below the plant we come to the hexagonal crystal with six sides. It is light bearing and a carrier. In fact our entire silicon systems are truly based on the silicon light fields of crystal transmissions. If we go upwards into the blood stream of the human being we discover that the red and white cells are sensitive to light. We find that Living Light, eyes and cells must breath light and seeing is a form of breathing.  The double Helix is also something that was clairvoyantly understood in The tree of Yggdrasil. The mystery language goes very deep into the Tree of Life. It even enters into the Cabbala, the tarot numbers and the alphabet.


Let me offer two more observations. The animal is a 22 chromosome complex and the human is a 23 chromosome complex. This takes place in the cell but now we come to the numerical situation with our Earth as a cosmic organism. While the North Star and Vega cut a 46 degree axis, as the angle of the earth, we find the number 23 popping up again in the degrees of tilt that express themselves in the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn. 


Since a cells attains to 46 chromosomes before it splits into 23, we suddenly arrive at the amazing conclusion that the Earth is not abstractly sitting in the position it is in, nor is it an abstract number of Chromosomes.  Does Pax 6 mean six sided? I doubt it. But the exact field of the mathematics of the Hexagon is a tight spiritual and mathematical clue into the journey of genetics.


Some Goethean observations we should be aware of. If we look at the insects there are some that are 'compatible' with certain plants.. (mind you I would love to have such a real list somewhere to look at) You would find that the various tubes and feeders that insects have developed to get the sweet digested light nectar from the plants, because they are actually astrally related to the plants reveal transgenic wisdom. The plants do not have an astral body exactly, even if they come close with The Venus Fly Trap and others... But the Plant is on the way to becoming an animal. It would need a nervous system, which is hovering outside it with compatible insect combinations.


If we wanted to make logical and cosmically lawful Goethean  observations and carry creation forward consciously we would have to merge insect proper to plant proper. But ethically we still must acknowledge the transgenic phase of the four kingdoms: Mineral, Plant, Animal and Human. To phase shift them and prematurely tug them to a higher field of karma makes us very, very responsible and we haven't even touched on this shattering direction to evolutionary thinking.


Little things, like altering life patterns and shifting the axis of the Earth herself are really strictly speaking part of the Chaos theory. If I do something to a butterfly in Hong Kong it changes something in South Africa. The astral Earth needs the migration tracks of various bird and animal species. Altering things might change more than we bargained for.


Bradford Riley



Dear Frank,

I found the last (September 2001) "Southern Cross" very good. This is particularly the case of the article on genes. There was also humour I liked including Einstein in Africa and particularly the conversation between Watson and Holmes. Ute Craemer can write from her own experience. Note that Rudolf Steiner changed after the early lecture reproduced. I understand that he later criticized Sinnet in  particular. All of Rudolf Steiner's statements are not unchanging truths.

Michael Friedjung