menu Home chevron_right
Ground ZeroRecent Shows


Ron Patton | May 21, 2018
Sponsored By:



In an era of conspiracy theory du’jour, it is hard to keep track of the many different theories and ideas that are being espoused by the internet. I often think to myself that Ground Zero sets the dialogue for a lot of ideas that may be better defined or even revealed through other sources that are inspired by the ideas that are chosen to be exposed.

Sometimes conspiracy theories get no respect until they are governmentalized to the extent that they embody discourse in news, blogs, congressional hearings, political advertisements and practices.

Then, they have to go through the vetting process for bias and unless it can be made into a political trope – it will often be labeled misinformation or disinformation even though that it is obviously a sound theory which becomes a threat to any and all mainstream discourse.

It is almost as if you can single out the most savory tidbits of conspiracy theory because they aggravate the mainstream and offend the subgroups that wish to control the narrative.

Suspicion has always been why our constitutional republic has thrived – and as there are thought police trying to take away the civil right to question, the truth will never be exposed.

Conspiracy theory resonates with the public in general – and it aggravates those who wish to control the information.

Ever since the film Avenger’s Infinity War was released in theaters, I have been receiving many e-mails about how this is all a convenient form of predictive programming with regard to population control and that the main villain, Thanos can be seen as some monolith government idea that illustrates a popular fear in these times of global sustainability and the idea that there is a secret agenda to depopulate the planet.

Conspiracy theories about depopulation of the Earth come in a number of varieties. The general theme running through these theories is either that there is an imminent plan to reduce population using an overpopulation crisis as the pretext, or a secret eugenics plan cover-up.

The elite thus need to kill off the “useless eaters” so, in the first case, they survive the crisis and, in the second, they can create either enough robots to replace them, or a new race of obedient super-humans.

The plot of the Avengers film revolves around a deity named Thanos that seeks to collect Infinity Stones so he can use them to destroy half of human civilization in order to preserve the planet Earth – he apparently feels triggered because his own planet suffered from over population.

Thanos actually believes that what he is about to do will make him the good guy as those who are hungry will be fed and will develop a devotion to him and worship him as a god or a deliverer.

It has always been the concept that apotheosis or being seen as a god comes through human sacrifice and those doing the deed are the ones that are worshipped either out of fear – or out of gratitude.

It creates primal unity in a sense because those who survive the blood bath of sacrifice has this wired in Saturnalian attitude, meaning that anciently people who survived the justice of Saturn would celebrate at year’s end their lives knowing that they were spared from the sythe of Father Time – Chronos or Saturn.

The idea of sacrifice to the Gods was always a blood offering or an offering of flesh as it was symbolic of the life’s blood that had to be shed so that others would live.

Eating of both human and animal flesh was restricted by dietary laws first implemented by the lawmakers anciently. The consumption of food and drink was subject to certain restrictions that became the basis for later Jewish dietary practices.

When a particular food restriction is regarded as God-given, as a form of instruction or command from the “Supreme” and thus play a role in the cultural or religious belief system , then it is usually seen as part of a ‘package’ to protect the believers, to safeguard them against evil. To doubt, even to ask any questions about the reasons behind the food restriction is seen as blasphemous.

There has always been a debate over the consumption of meat.

Scientists and nutritionists are obliged to scrutinize, to question and although many food restrictions do not appear to have a health-related, ‘rational’ explanation, some clearly have become established, because of the aim to protect the health of an individual and in some cases aid in food control for a population that grows exponentially, creating a food crisis and eventual famine.

Beyond the predictive programming of 2018’s The Avengers, we can look back at a film that arrived on the scene in 1973 called, Soylent Green that predicted in the early 2020’s that mankind would be forced to eat a cracker which had a mysterious secret ingredient.

In a 21st century dystopia where Earth’s population has grown to an unmanageable size, humanity struggles to feed the population. To counter the problem of hungry mouths and rising food prices, an entity called the Soylent Corporation comes up with a lucrative and effective solution: a mass-produced, processed foodstuff called, Soylent. Coming in three colors – red, yellow and green, the official line is that the stuff is derived from vegetables and plankton.

It takes a New York detective, played by Charlton Heston, to find out the unpleasant truth behind Soylent Green’s origins, resulting in a horrified outburst that has since passed into sci-fi legend.

“Soylent Green is people – it is made from people.”


Coincidentally the film, Soylent Green may be more relevant now than it has ever been.

The world population is now cresting over seven billion, we are being told that devastating global pandemics are a constant threat, Chemtrails are poisoning the air. We are told that contamination of dwindling water, and food supplies are merely a given, and we are seeing a covert culling of the population through the use of GMO foods and untested vaccines and pharmaceuticals.

The film, Soylent Green actually was set in the year 2022 a mere four years from now.

I would also say that many people remember the meme, Soylent Green is people more so than they remember the film itself.

We only remember the atmosphere and the details—the humid green haze hanging over the city of New York, the food riots, the unending squalor, the homeless sleeping on stoops and crowded into the church.

Much of what we are experiencing now.

We’re still on the same track now as we were then, and for decades the experts have been telling us that unless we do something drastic, the world of Soylent Green envisioned may well remain an accurate portrait of the world we live in.

Soylent Green is not just people – it is about people that live in 2018 and how population reduction programs maybe the next step in trying to feed the hungry. There are also food alternatives that have been developed to try and feed the hungry including lab grown meats and plant alternative proteins that can be made to satisfy a hungry world.

Believe it or not, lab grown meat will be on store shelves at the end of 2018.

Back in August of 2013, we reported that a team of Dutch scientists showed off their lab-grown burger which cost a mere $330,000 to make. There was even provided a taste test for other people who were curious about the new food.

The meat has been called many things. It has been nicknamed, in-vitro meat; it is also known as cultured meat or “shmeat.” Alternative names include hydroponic meat, test-tube meat, vat-grown meat and victimless meat.


It is NOT synthetic or artificial meat because it comes from an animal, however, it has never been part of a complete, living animal. It is also not imitation meat, which is a vegetarian food product produced from vegetable protein, usually from soy or gluten. Those types of “meat type” products provide an emotional bridge for people who can’t completely deal with leaving behind the taste of meat.

Environmentally friendly, lab-grown meat might be better for us, because cultured meats would be produced in sterile environments and would be free of such dangerous bacteria, which could significantly reduce fatal food-related infections. However, do the overall benefits outweigh the risks?

Western meat-eating has been a target of world environmental policing for some time and while meat eaters have become easy targets for the derision of the globalists, the new lab meat would solve a lot of problems. The meat is cruelty free and so there is no guilt, there is no farming, no grazing and no greenhouse gasses. It is better living through science, right?

Well, most people are not comfortable with it.

Knowing that lab meats will be offered in the next few months, Missouri state lawmakers passed an omnibus agriculture bill that prevents any future lab-grown products that hit the market from calling their product, Meat.

This measure would also ban companies from using the term “plant-based meat” to describe their products.

The change was approved on a 125-22 vote and was backed by the state’s pork producers, the Missouri Farm Bureau and the Missouri Cattlemen’s Association.

Critics see the act as an attempt from the beef lobby to clamp down on the $5 billion “fake” meat industry, which has boomed from the public’s increasing appetite for healthier, more humane and environmentally sustainable food products.

Earlier this year, Tyson Foods, one of the largest meat companies in the U.S., announced it is ramping up its investment in lab-grown animal protein in response to growing demand for meat worldwide. The company’s venture capital arm purchased a minority stake in Memphis Meats, a San Francisco-based “clean” meat startup.

Still, Big Beef perceives meatless meats as a threat to the industry. Major national trade bodies such as the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the National Farmers Union have petitioned the United States Agricultural Department over the labeling issue.

Missouri will be the first state in the country to enact such legislation if the bill, sponsored by state Sen. Brian Munzlinger, is signed into law. The state’s House already passed their own version.

The act “prohibits misrepresenting a product as meat that is not derived from harvested production livestock or poultry.”

A recent Nielsen poll found 23 percent of consumers want more plant-based proteins on the shelves. Health Focus International also found that 60 percent of U.S. consumers said they are reducing their consumption of meat-based products.

Missouri’s bill is akin to a measure announced in France this month that bans food producers from labeling plant-based products as a meat item.

I would argue however that lab grown meat is still meat as it is harvested from the DNA of livestock and poultry.

At its most elementary, the process involves taking stem cells from a living animal, say, a chicken, and then feeding those cells various nutrients until enough tissue is produced for the desired outcome: a burger, fried chicken or pork.

According to proponents of this technology, there are fewer environmental problems with lab meat than the traditional method of raising and slaughtering animals. Producing meat without actually growing and feeding an animal requires fewer resources—a tenth of the land and water, and less than half of the energy conventional meat needs.

The biggest winners from the deal will likely be the three Israeli clean meat companies, SuperMeat, Meat the Future, and Future Meat Technologies, which by the way, the lab or clean meat will be kosher including pork.

China is also interested in the technology because of the population’s demand for meat.

China isn’t alone in their interest in clean meat. Billionaires Bill Gates and Richard Branson, and the agricultural giant Cargill, have all this year invested in the Bay Area startup Memphis Meats as part of their $17 million Series A funding round.

All these clean meat startups, which are mostly based in Silicon Valley and Israel, are vying to be the first to get their products to market, whether it be beef, chicken, pork or duck. (Some, like Memphis Meats, have done prototypes, but there’s not yet a product you can buy at your local grocery store.)

The problem is how to scale in a way that gets lab-grown meat to a reasonable price point, and production costs are coming down quickly. Even though it may be available to consumers soon – the price will take four to five years to scale down.

When meat becomes scarce and becomes to environmentally unfriendly to produce the United Nations recommends a Vegan diet in order to maintain balance on the planet.

With the costs of conventional meat farming techniques constantly increasing and an increased demand from a rising world population, in-vitro meat may be one of several new technologies needed to maintain food supplies by the year 2050. Conventional meat production may simply become too expensive for the average consumer to support. These meat sources would not have to rely on grain, pesticides or even GMO feeds in order to be made.

A vegan or vegetarian who feels badly about an animal suffering will no longer have to worry with this meat, since an animal does not have to die in order for it to be eaten. The animal only needs to have a needle extract blood from the muscle and from there meat is created in a laboratory.

Not only that, PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) has been investing in cultured meat research for the past eight years to save animals. PETA first announced a $1 million prize in 2008 for the first laboratory to use chicken cells to create commercially viable in vitro (test tube) meat.

The debut of a lab-grown burger or meatball is the first important step toward realizing their goal of one day putting environmentally sound, humanely produced real meat into the hands and mouths of the people who insist upon eating animal flesh.

PETA has also challenged scientists to create in-vitro chicken and in-vitro pork.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development estimates that the demand for meat in North America will increase by 8 percent by 2020, in Europe by 7 percent and in Asia by 56 percent.

This will be the ultimate solution in order to be environmentally friendly and to avoid harassment from the Green Police.

Researchers say lab-grown meat might be better for us, because cultured meats would be produced in sterile environments and would be free of such dangerous bacteria. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that pathogens in conventional meat are the most common sources of fatal food-related infections.

And the use of antibiotics in food-producing animals to fight disease and help the animals grow faster, has been identified as a source of antibiotic-resistant bacteria that is dangerous to humans. The Food and Drug Administration estimates that the sales of antibiotics for such usage has been going up — by about 23 percent between 2009 and 2014.

Cultured meat, will have significantly reduced, saturated fat, which raises the level of bad cholesterol, increasing risk of stroke or heart disease. Healthier omega-3 fatty acids could be added in order to replace the bad cholesterol and fat content.

Lab-grown meat may be better for the environment and improve on several health aspects of conventional meat.

But for now, at least, it can’t be exactly like regular meat and have no potential health downsides whatsoever.

People have a tough time with meat grown in a lab, but they are more than happy to eat other foods that they are unaware are created and tested in a lab as well.

No matter what food product or ingredient you make, you can count on scientists and food testing labs to analyze its nutritional value, recommend additives to prevent contamination, and create ways to maintain shelf life.

Most of your food is already made and tested in a lab.

You eat it anyway.

In the story, Green Eggs and Ham by Dr. Seuss there is a bit of a moral that can be applied to the idea of eating lab meat.

As Sam tries to get the narrator to eat green eggs and ham, the narrator becomes stubborn and says he doesn’t like the idea of eating green eggs and ham and refuses to eat.

Later, he relents and realizes that he likes them.

But of course, the moral of the story is that you shouldn’t make up your mind about something until you’ve tried it.

Written by Ron Patton

Search Ground Zero


  • play_circle_filled

    Ground Zero Radio

  • cover play_circle_filled


  • cover play_circle_filled


  • cover play_circle_filled


  • cover play_circle_filled


  • cover play_circle_filled

    Episode 86 – How To Succeed In Faking An Alien Invasion Without Really Trying!

  • cover play_circle_filled

    Episode 85 – TIN FOIL HATE

  • cover play_circle_filled

    Episode 84 – BLOOD AND SOIL

  • cover play_circle_filled


  • cover play_circle_filled


  • cover play_circle_filled


  • cover play_circle_filled


  • cover play_circle_filled


  • cover play_circle_filled

    Episode 78 – METEOR RIGHT

  • cover play_circle_filled

    Episode 77 – Elenin’s Requiem: Guest Donny Gilson

  • cover play_circle_filled


play_arrow skip_previous skip_next volume_down

Ground zero


get all the ground zero news
directly to your inbox