You do realise that dna sequencing is only a language humans have found based on the tools they had to see it right? Neaning you change the tool or the perspective of the same, a different relay is available. Just like me saying these words, there’s syntax and there’s sound. Both use and can relay different things, a sound can give us a wave diagram but our recording can give us a transcript. Same thing, two different tools and perspectives. Humans have only looked at it in one way.

What if a womans egg was to be implanted in another womans and have the masculine genes of both create a bond that reinforces the building block of the egg? What if the egg, as it already does in choosing which sperm to fertilise it, could retrace the residuals of both the women into getting from one’s egg and one’s body the elements it needs. It already does so, so what happens if we raise the volume of its ability to attract all the ingredients it needs. We just raise its abilities and watch what it does and leartn from it and apply next, to see what brings us closer to it.

In this way imprinting would be the energetical residues of a man’s sperm or call it dna trace that contributed to the development and sustains the development of a woman, as we both have masculine and feminine aspects, ut is not just from birth we can get male dna, it is throughout our lives. And imprinting here would be the energies of the man’s dna of the woman’s body imprinting its energetical aspects on the egg, almost to resemble the abilities of a man’s sperm. If that can be possible, tested and replicated multiple times, we would have broken biology forever into its ascensions, menaing there would be nothing that could stop it from there.

What if Bella is the womb of the woman, the woman is the edward that carries the dead energies of the men that make up the woman pre or post her own conception and Jacob is the new egg that resonates with the body and the Ys in both, check the picture as it tells me something about potentially splitting the x chromosome to find the Y.

I did not ask you to give me your interpretation. I asked you to look at biology of this finding through the lenses of twilight, not just the imprint aspect.

Your sentence misses a great point. Recognition. Which effects suggest a capacity is already present doesn’t say about those who’s effects aren’t visible or aren’t visible to the lense of observation. Some might be there but think it’s absent. And viceversa.

Your other sentence is limited, it only states that evidence that’s been found should be beared by conclusions, but that”s the wrong priority, cause if the evidence is incomplete, yet still evidence, the whole conclusion is tainted, yet seemingly functional.

….

Well we cannot test the compatibility nor the ability of the egg tondo what it already does in organising energy if we don’t even make it possible for it to attrcat the right energies in an egg.
If the woman receives 2 chromosomes from the father, there must be a way to look at the whole sequence and find a y chrimosome in there or maybe by looking at them as one, instead of a pair.

This is the right question: Does a particular father-inherited sequence or regulatory state in both women provide a developmental function that the egg could access—and is its paternal origin itself responsible for that effect?

If we already know that microchimerism is real, we already have a great gateway to reverse engireen and understand or guid le the egg to choose specific chimeric resonances. Like giving it a rada or finding a way to trick the egg into thinking it is fecondated so that in order to complete the sequence it only attrracts what is needed and is resonant to filling the gap. It’s like reverse fecondation, menaing tapping into what the mind of the egg would be and trigger what has it think it has already gone through the process of having united with a sperm.

The same way we smell each other snd not always ourselves, we want the egg to think it has to smell what the other has, meaning to take on the essence of the other whilst also grounding the energies of the egg in the woman, as way to ground itself into her womb. Meaning we want the woman to be fertile yet use a egg from outside her body, so that the two can come together and work together inheriting each others dna to build one.

We already know energy stays behind, meaning women house residue from all the man they’ve been with without condoms, whether through vaginal or mourh intercourse. That’s how our body knows to recognise what’s foreign and what’s friendly, it remembers an apple is good and not enemy to our body. Whether historically over through consumption, just like raising new weights, by the time we normalise it it’ll forever stay as muscle memory to be activated at any time. Amd if sustained activation it gets even stronger snd up to the next weight level.

Energy is anything traceable, the identification is the plethora of data it rpovides us with reason why I call it eneegg, I don’t want to supress it to a specificality, cause during these investigations we want to find what it provides, not just looking for things.

I used the letters, cause god loves parallels, I want that to be a guide, a silly one if so, for researchers to look into it.

You do realise that dna sequencing is only a language humans have found based on the tools they had to see it right? Neaning you change the tool or the perspective of the same, a different relay is available. Just like me saying these words, there’s syntax and there’s sound. Both use and can relay different things, a sound can give us a wave diagram but our recording can give us a transcript. Same thing, two different tools and perspectives. Humans have only looked at it in one way.

And because of this, you actually don’t know if finding a Y chromosome would solve it or not.

And via that same lens, everything you say can be arguable and limited. For science has only looked at biology through the tools under the hood of science.

…..

If none supply or account to a complete account of life, they’ve only seen it one way. I stand by it and that way is in segmented ways, instead of putting together all those ways as one. Imagine one tool that does them all at once. That’s what I’m talking about, yet we don’t tell it how to relay the information. We allow it to give what it finds and extract from there just like most do from my blog, just trusting what’s seen and I guess presuming I wouldn’t lead them astray.

The goal should be to learn the language it’d relay, not tell it which language we are comfortable with, as it can limitel the information it aquires if cannot be translated in the language delictated.

I didn’t say Microchimerism is what tells us that women hold energy I said we already know. That’s your ignorant projection and assumption.

I used another aspect of biology, which interestingly enough as clear as I was, as I used the example of an apple, you were still inable to understand what I meant by it.

You really don’t understand shit, but thanks for trhrowing ideas on a wall. I should have never expected the wall to speak, but it allowed me to practice my reception.

…

https://chatgpt.com/share/6ae37689-ab08-83ed-91fa-145e9168482a?ogimg=plain