Making sense of life has been my goal for the past eighty-five years, and it has involved the personal study of meditation, hypnosis, spiritualism, mystical experience, ghosts and dowsing, as well as an exploration of many sciences. I followed wherever the evidence led. Through the course of my work, I discovered that DNA controls life in a totally different manner to what we have been told. I was quite unprepared to learn that for the past seventy-five years, a well-meaning physicist has led biologists astray, and that the obvious solution to the difficulties they face solves many other mysteries and affects other theories. These include the mystery of inheritance, which alters the theory of evolution. Another theory is that everything we identify as ‘paranormal’ is actually part of the normal mechanism of life, which telepathically transfers information from parents to offspring during the process of growth. If taken separately, the individual parts of my proposed theory may appear questionable, but when taken as a whole, the evidence and science of each radical element fits together to form a single hypothesis.
My realisation that the understanding of genes and DNA was the key led me to a conference at The Royal Institution, which was organised in 2018 ‘to rethink the philosophy of biology’. It was sponsored by the European Research Council, where the seventy-five-year-old belief that DNA is a book of instructions was severely questioned, although no alternative suggestions were made. It was clear that a new philosophy of biology was required; in fact, one lecturer, Denis Walsh, said that we needed a ‘new core theory’. My idea from 1984 fitted the bill and the evidence I had accumulated all supported a new theory. If DNA is not a book of instructions then what could it be? We all know the answer – even children know it. We are copies of our parents. It is now apparent that DNA is no more than our personal identity code, which again is public knowledge.
In my study of telepathy, I realised that the carrier of telepathic information is the same as the carrier of the instructions to grow a child in the womb. The carrier relies on the similarity of the parents’ identity codes with the child’s code to make the correct connection, in the same way as personal telephone numbers are needed to make a telephone call. This is all very obvious, but at the same time it’s a complete upheaval for the science of DNA and genetics. In the process, it gives an understanding of the growth of the brain and mind, of what we call inheritance and of much more besides.
An Introduction The Unsolved Problems of Biology
Scientists say our genes are the blueprint for life and a book of instructions that directly control our growth and behaviour. The trouble is that although genes appear to be the blueprint, there is evidence to show that they cannot work that way. This is biology’s great conundrum – a problem that many scientists don’t even want to talk about. I am convinced there is something fundamentally wrong with the science of biology but that the conundrum can be solved by a new theory, with evidence to back it up, which in turn will provide the answers to many other scientific puzzles. This book examines this new solution to the problems of biology.
In 1981, English author and biologist Rupert Sheldrake put forth a solution to the problem when he suggested in his book New Science of Life that morphic resonance – or fields – between members of any species accounted for their growth and form. This concept had been studied since 1910 without success.1.1 Before publication, the New Scientist said of Sheldrake’s ideas: ‘Of course, within the context of modern science, such an idea is completely scatty.’
Sheldrake’s ideas were controversial because most scientists at the time believed all life grows according to plans in DNA. The editor of the science publication Nature referred to Sheldrake’s book as one ‘for burning’ and subsequently said during a BBC interview: ‘Sheldrake is putting forward magic instead of science, and that can be condemned in exactly the language that the Pope used to condemn Galileo, and for the same reason. It is heresy.’
This book contains unorthodox opinions – in other words, it is another heresy.
For over a hundred years, there has been the suggestion that the development of structures and organs during animal growth are caused by some indivisible field. But how this may work has never been adequately explained.
My heresy provides the answers by presenting the evidence that has previously been lacking. It addresses those same unresolved problems and suggests that genes and DNA control life indirectly by morphic fields rather than directly, offering a mechanism based on the evidence and fresh (heretic) ideas. This completely new way of looking at biology relies on the obvious fact that we are direct replicas, or copies, of our parents and their families, where the information flows by morphic fields. I believe we copy the structures, organs and brain directly from our two parents rather than from our DNA, which serves an entirely different purpose.
In 1944, the physicist Erwin Schrödinger, who was a Nobel laureate for physics, wrote a book entitled What is Life?, in which he said: ‘It is these chromosomes . . . that contain, in some kind of code script, the entire pattern of the individual’s future development and of its functioning in the mature state . . . they are the law – code and executive power – or, to use another simile, they are the architect’s plan and builder’s craft – in one.’1.2
He used the word chromosomes, as DNA was not known at the time, saying they were both the architect and builder of life.
To this day, we are still following Schrodinger’s ideas, inferring that genes directly control life, form and behaviour. We say our genes are the book of instructions, but I am sure that’s wrong. Our unique DNA code is only two per cent of the total, but it is no more than a key enabling us to copy parental features, while the other ninety-eight per cent of our DNA is no more than a record of the changes to characteristics in our species, which have been carried forward since the beginning of time. That’s why we share ninety-eight per cent of our DNA with monkeys.
This simplistic and completely new way of looking at life is necessary because it is now recognised that genes do not directly control who we are.
Last year, I attended a conference at The Royal Institution in London about contemporary biology1.3, which was sponsored by the European Research Council. The aim was to ‘rethink the philosophy of biology’. Although none of the scientists in attendance actually dared to say that genes are not a book of instructions, it was clearly in the mind of the lecturers. I was in complete agreement when David Walsh, a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Toronto, said, ‘Biology is in a mess, so we need a new core theory.’
And it’s a new core theory that I propose here, showing that genes do not control life directly, but that they are only a record of family details. I will show that genes and DNA enable each new generation to be a replica of the last, where the information flows directly from the members of that previous generation, and not from DNA.
Saying that biology is in a mess is a gross understatement. Wherever you look there are anomalies that cannot be swept under the carpet. Sheldrake was correct when he said something else is needed to explain these anomalies, some sort of field that guides the growth and form of all life by directly reproducing previous generations – although he did not use that wording. Even a child can see we are reproductions of our parents. It’s incredible to realise that a Nobel physicist misled the world for seventy-five years with his book What is Life?
By turning the theory of genetics on its head, a new understanding for inheritance becomes available. We directly inherit information to create bodily form. Whereas previously inheritance was mysterious, having no explanatory mechanism, it must now be seen purely as a direct copying or replicating mechanism from our parents. Another factor is that the unconscious needs and desires of our parents are reproduced in their offspring and subsequent generations, which is known as diversity.