Print Friendly, PDF & Email


Cross Domain Bacteria (CDB) Protein : Exotic Crystal Biology
Clifford E Carnicom
Sep 18 2023


CDB Developed “Protein Crystal”
Magnification 3200x

This paper bears within important ramifications for the human race. Straight lines in nature are relatively rare.  Right angles are even less common.  There are a very few minerals that possess such characteristics, but even those express relatively simple geometry.  Straight lines and right angles combined are a difficult challenge to find in the natural organic or biological world.  The addition of interior parallel, grid and grid subdivisions combined with irregular geometry and unusual projections should sharpen our senses even further.

The act of a protein in nature producing a crystal structure alone is similarly a rare find, and it is at the forefront of the most advanced levels in biological research.  It is not an easy situation to produce even within that branch of research.  History and literature on the subject is generally scant, and pursuit of knowledge about it quickly involves higher level physics, particularly X-Ray Diffraction.  X-Ray Diffraction is the method by which the structure of DNA was discovered.

As we see:


“Developing protein crystals is a difficult process influenced by many factors, including pH, temperature, ionic strength in the crystallization solution, and even gravity. Once formed, these crystals can be used in structural biology to study the molecular structure of the protein, particularly for various industrial or medical purposes”(Wikipedia).

[Wikipedia is heavily biased, manipulated and censored, however, it remains suitable for some basic technical needs-CEC]


Here are a couple of general readership articles that will introduce the subject of protein crystals:

Biological crystals: at the interface between physics, chemistry and biology, Dominique Cornuéjols

Growing crystals from protein, Beat Blattmann, Patrick Sticher

They are worthy of review, and a call to the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility in France may be appropriate under the circumstances.

Let us first discuss where these crystals come from.  They arise as an outgrowth from the isolation of the water soluble protein of the Cross Domain Bacteria (CDB) as described in a previous paper, A Source of Global Harm: The Cross Domain Bacteria (CDB) Proteins, Sep 2023.  There are several stages in the isolation process that takes place, and the crystals will begin to form and settle within 24 hours of final purification, and will subsequently mature.  The process has now been repeated three times with identical results. It has already been established that this particular protein form is toxic.

Let us take a look at a few representative images under the scope, along with a few parting comments.


CDB “Protein Crystal”
Structured but irregular geometry, numerous right angles
combined with variable internal dimensions
Magnification 3200x


CDB “Protein Crystal”
Structured but irregular geometry, numerous right angles
combined with internal variable subdivision
Magnification 3200x


CDB “Protein Crystal”
Active CDB manufacturing site
Extraordinary combination of biological and “crystallization” processes
Unusual projection and discontinuity of material
The likelihood of “biological circuitry” must be acknowledged here.
Magnification 8000x


CDB “Protein Crystal”
Structured but irregular geometry, numerous right angles
combined with variable internal dimensions. Slot construction.
Magnification 3200x


CDB classic biological filament combined with “Protein Crystals”
Magnification 3200x


Fourscore and many times past one might think the questions that arise above would be of hot pursuit.  From the general history, I have no expectations of such from those of position or influence.  The obligation and duty remains, nevertheless.

It is not difficult to assess that Carnicom Institute has remained most conservative in its assessment over the years regarding synthetic biology “proof”, as it were.  The implication of synthetic biology has been pronounced, but restraint has also been continually exercised because of the many surprises always before us in the world of science.

It is now time, however, to choose reason over caution, as we now encounter a barrage of overwhelming evidence to indicate that synthetic biology is in full force in front of, and within us.

Is it now reasonable to conclude that we, as a species, are an unwilling subject of “synthetic biology”?  I think so. It would be to our mutual benefit to be proven wrong.

You have the freedom to think and make your own decision.  My role has been to patiently and consistently seek and provide information to assist in that process, and to call those of influence to “engage”, as has been mentioned in recent papers.

Bacterial forms are now commonly used as a vehicle for genetic manipulation and protein generation(i.e., expression).  The truth is that it is more of a staple operation than I have recognized.  The classic case of this is insulin production, which is well accepted by millions across the globe. Insulin originally came from cows and pigs, but for reasons that many consider justifiable, genetic engineering was born.  Here are a few lay descriptions of what has come to pass that involves the combination of bacteria, genetic engineering, and manufactured proteins (insulin is a protein, the CDB produce proteins, and every living creature produces proteins):


“You can learn more about the history of genetic engineering in episode 23 of series 1 – GMO, OMG! – but it’s quite simple: take the human insulin gene, stitch it into a circle of bacterial DNA known as a plasmid and put it into bacteria. Then grow up the modified bugs in large vats of broth and wait as they pump out pure human insulin, which you can then purify and give to patients.”


Recombinant DNA is a technology scientists developed that made it possible to insert a human gene into the genetic material of a common bacterium. This “recombinant” micro-organism could now produce the protein encoded by the human gene.


 “A great deal of research went into producing human insulin by means of genetic engineering. The genetic material of a bacterium [or] a yeast is reprogrammed to make insulin instead of the proteins it would normally produce. This insulin is purified so that it contains no trace of the original bacterium.”


And so now we get to ask: What if the introduced gene into the bacteria was not human? Can that be done too?  And the answer is yes.

And then we get to ask, what if the introduced gene(s) into the bacteria was from an unknown species or life form (at least to most of us)?  Could that be done also?  I see no reason why not.

And then we must now ask, what if the introduced gene came from either a synthetic or foreign (e.g., xenobiology, exobiology) life form?  Could that be done also.  I would certainly expect so.

If the proteins generated by the life form and the life form are not currently known, registered or acknowledged in the public database (the CDB are not), then I think that the focus must quickly entertain the final question above.  The orchestration and scale of events over the last 25 years plus surpasses all nation interests.

Once again, you decide.  It would be to our mutual benefit to be proven wrong.

A truthful answer might go a long way towards explaining the refusals which have taken place to identify the nature of the CDB DNA – please recall that event documented in the paper, “A Source of Global Harm: The Cross Domain Bacteria (CDB) Proteins” (Sep 2023).

It is therefore more than feasible, and quite reasonable,  that the CDB itself is either of synthetic nature or is a vehicle through which synthetic biology is expressed.  The ultimate expression of the CDB is indeed the proteins that are created in the human body, and hence the need for more aggressive “engagement”.

“The time is nigh…”

Clifford E Carnicom

Born Clifford Bruce Stewart, Jan 19, 1953.



Thanks for sharing!
Follow by Email