Page 7«..6789..»

Category Archives: Transhumanist

Education and Enhancement in a Transhuman Future – Patheos

Posted: October 8, 2019 at 11:45 am

by David Lewin

Should we expect the schools of the future to be saturated with technology? It has been widely reported (e.g. https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/319288) that some leaders within major Silicon Valley tech companies have, rather hypocritically, chosen to limit the influence of their products on their own children, by restricting access to screen time and social media. Take the following report:

You cant put your face in a device and expect to develop a long-term attention span, [said] Taewoo Kim, chief AI engineer at the machine-learning startup One Smart Lab A practicing Buddhist, Kim is teaching his nieces and nephews, ages 4 to 11, to meditate and appreciate screen-free games and puzzles. Once a year he takes them on tech-free silent retreats at nearby Buddhist temples. (https://www.businessinsider.com/silicon-valley-parents-raising-their-kids-tech-free-red-flag-2018-2)

Other educational spaces also appear to provide shelter from technology saturation, for instance Waldorf schools, which prioritise outdoor learning and low-tech play. This concern to shelter students reflects certain perceived risks of technology saturation: distractedness and diminished attention span, heightened depression and anxiety, poor health and obesity and, in extreme cases, suicide. Limiting access to technology has become newsworthy because of the prevailing assumption that technology enhances education. Whatever the truth of the matter, we currently know little about the long-term impact of many technologies on the educational formation of young people: the influence of technology seems widespread, indeterminate, and seldom given sufficient justification. This knowledge gap is by no means unique to modern technologys educational interventions, but is at the foundation of education itself: there is an interpretive gap between what educators intend and what students learn.

This raises two general questions: First, how do we justify influencing others? If the answer to this question is basically consequentialist (because the outcomes of influence are good), then we are presented with a second question which problematizes this response: namely, what are we to make of the gap between our intentions to influence or enhance, and the outcomes of these intentions?

I would argue that human enhancements have existed as long as education itself. Nick Bostrom and Anders Sandberg (https://nickbostrom.com/cognitive.pdf) have suggested that education may be usefully labelled as a conventional means of human enhancement, as distinct from nominally unconventional means of enhancement, such as nootropic drugs, gene therapy, or neural implants. This distinction has its place, though Bostrom and Sandberg acknowledge the continuum between enhancements that are conventional (working through education) and unconventional (drawing upon recent technologies), making the distinction fluid, indeterminate and contextual. Caffeine is one thing, but gene editing for purposes of non-therapeutic interventions (e.g. selecting or removing traits in reproduction) remains controversial. Of course, convention is a rather unstable form of justification. In general, the question of the justification of unconventional enhancement parallels that of conventional enhancement. It is one of the key questions that shapes education theory: namely, how are our intentions to influence justified?

The gap between the intentions and the outcomes could be understood as a weakness or risk intrinsic to education. Gert Biesta speaks of the beautiful risk of education (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMqFcVoXnTI), arguing that it is a misconception to see education as a stable relation between inputs and outputs in which we can eliminate the unexpected or the risky. To construe education without risk is to miss something of its beauty. Education can make use of, or better, relies on this gap in order to create spaces that are essentially open to something unbidden, an opening that involves, as Hannah Arendt puts it, the coming of the new and young. By contrast, the sciences of learning have worked to eliminate this gap through the development of what is known as the behavioural objectives model in which measurable educational objectives and outcomes are made explicit and become the sole target of education. The behavioural objectives model can be interpreted as the expression of technical subjectivity in which all forms of insecurity are eliminated in favor of pure transmission, and the risks of exposure to the unbidden are minimised. The idea that behavioural objectives ensure control of the educational process is seductive but, illusory and ultimately corrosive since, as Arendt, Biesta and others have argued, the educational event itself depends upon the introduction of something radically new. What makes the new radical here is that there is a discontinuity between the conditions in which newness may arrive, and the very arrival itself. Something about the new is necessarily unanticipated. Without the new, education becomes the reproduction of the old which, echoing Adornos critiques of Halbbildung (half-education), is only ever half the educational story.

This gap between educational intention and what actually takes place demands something of those involved: speculative, or interpretive judgements. We might say that interpretation constitutes the pedagogical relation between educator and student: the educator speculates that the student is educable, projecting ideas about what capacities the student could realise through certain educational influences; the student speculates about what the educator intends and is capable of, e.g. that they are (or are not) both interested in and able to support the students growth. Then there is speculation about the outcomes of the educational event: the enhancement of a capacity may not be immediately obvious to the student or educator, taking days, months or even years to be properly realised or recognised. In short, there is a great deal of faith in pedagogical structures, processes and relations. This is significant because unconventional means of enhancement likewise involve speculation, risk, and judgement. Just as writing may enhance or diminish human memory, so ubiquitous access to google may extend and undermine certain cognitive capacities; at least an ambivalence should be noted. Unconventional means of enhancement through, for instance, drugs like Ritalin or Modafinil, might be thought to involve unacceptable risks in comparison to conventional schooling, but risks are part of any effort to influence because they are defined by the gap described between intention and outcome.

In her essay The Crisis in Education, Arendt says that hope always hangs on the new which every generation brings; but precisely because we can base our hope only on this, we destroy everything if we so try to control the new that we, the old, can dictate how it will look. Indeed, the older generation cannot fully anticipate changes brought on by the young but can, indeed must, show the world and let go, hoping that in doing so conditions are created in which the new may arrive. Education involves creating conditions in which it is possible for the new to come in to the world, conditions that might also be described in terms of openness: openness to the mystery, the unbidden, the Other, or as self-transcendence.

I would not be the first to challenge the view that the technologically defined immortality of transhumanism would be an enhancement, though my challenge is based on educational insights. Specifically, the transhuman quest for immortality, in which the old seeks to sustain itself indefinitely, seems to oppose the radical renewal of education described by Arendt and others. There is the basic problem of resources: the old must make space for the new by the renewal of life through death, which perhaps could be solved by extraterrestrial colonization or through digitization and uploading. However, the educational principle that life is constituted by a creative tension between those coming in to the world (the young) and those going out (the old) is a basic condition for life itself. The necessity of education correlates with the necessity of the renewal of the world.

Rather than being regarded as revolutionary or radical, transhumanism is, then, fundamentally and ruinously conservative: it seeks to sustain what is, as it is. Transhumanists sometimes berate those who are hesitant about the scale and scope of technological change as bio-conservative, though maybe the transhuman community itself that is the most conservative of all: it fails to see how the preservation of the old world is an affront to the ongoing renewal that sustains the world.

This renewal is not a case of the new entirely replacing or displacing the old, as a cult of youth might have it. By no means does this jettison tradition and the past. In order for children to arrive in the world, they must, says Arendt, be introduced to it. Herein lies the legitimate but limited authority of educators: that, by showing the world, they are able to take responsibility for it, while letting the forces of renewal remake it. Arendt ends her Crisis in Education essay with the following appeal to love:

Education is the point at which we decide whether we love the world enough to assume responsibility for it and by the same token save it from that ruin which, except for renewal, except for the coming of the new and young, would be inevitable. And education, too, is where we decide whether we love our children enough not to expel them from our world and leave them to their own devices, nor to strike from their hands their chance of undertaking something new, something unforeseen by us, but to prepare them in advance for the task of renewing a common world.

For Arendt, this renewal is not realised in a techno-utopia in which we may exist indefinitely, but a common world in which the old order is in constant transformative renewal. This means convention and tradition provide the ground for representing the world to the young, who then are able to introduce something new through invention and transformation. This balance between old and new, past and future, makes education both necessary and possible.

My concerns are less that transhuman prospects for extended or unending life are real possibilities than what these prospects indicate about contemporary attitudes to human formation and education: namely, the current technologisation of education disregards the interpretive gap which makes education more than a mechanical process of construction. Bringing to view the interpretive gap reminds us that renewal is both possible and essential in order to exceed the conservative forces that seek only to recreate the patterns of the past.

Every parent, educator and transhumanist has an idea of the good and a belief or hope in the possibility of realising it; what might be called a faith in the future. Faith is necessary because of the gap between our intentions to make change, and the outcomes of those intentions. There is a twofold problem: we often dont know whether change is good, and even if we did know this, we often dont know if change can, or has, been realised. It is the human condition to live in this gap, a gap that requires us to live between the conventions and traditions that ground us, and the inventions and transformations that develop us. This gap ensures that, thankfully, the influences of the old on the young are not entirely mechanical or predictable, and that our humanity is staked upon a wager to affirm the world without hanging on to it indefinitely. Because of this gap, it is incumbent upon us to reflect upon the judgements that we must inevitably make, and the possible futures in which we put our faith, hope and love.

Continue reading here:
Education and Enhancement in a Transhuman Future - Patheos

Posted in Transhumanist | Comments Off on Education and Enhancement in a Transhuman Future – Patheos

Transhumanism – The Next Step to Super Humans?

Posted: April 21, 2019 at 6:50 am

Theres a lot of really cool stuff on this website. We have robots, powered prosthetics, genetic engineering, and so much more. Googling for any of this stuff could have brought you here, but thats not actually what this site is about.

Instead, its about a philosophy and an overarching idea about what it means to be human, and our destiny as a species. It re-imagines what it means to be human and how we can plot our way into the future. Its a philosophy that holds at its core the belief that human beings can transcend their limitations to become something more than they are.

Why are we the way we are? Human beings are the results of a long evolutionary process that spans billions of years into the past. We are the most intelligent and arguably most successful species to emerge from the vast variety of life on Earth; the result of an unbroken chain of evolutionary successes.

This does not mean that were the end of that chain, however. Humanity has room for improvement in many different ways.

Over the course of history and especially during the 20th century, our knowledge of the universe and our own biology has improved dramatically.

The list of diseases that we cannot cure or manage grows shorter every year. We can restore hearing to those who would have been deaf 100 years ago. Recently weve started doing the same for the blind. The average lifespan is now steadily climbing to the natural limit our genetics and current bodies will allow.

We are steadily mastering the art of how to make humans who are broken in some way whole again. Over the coming decades advancements in genetic engineering,biotechnology, AI, robotics, and many other scientific disciplines will likely eradicate most if not all the things that can go wrong with a human being.

Already people have realized you dont have to stop at restoring people to normality. Since technological development marches ever on, why not make people better than they were before?

For instance, why not give people sensory acuity that goes beyond what nature gives us? Seeing in infrared or hearing ultrasound are examples. Instead of prosthetics that give our limbs back, why not make those limbs stronger and faster?

One of the most important aspects of transhumanism is delaying or abolishing death itself. Apart from injury and illness, aging is the main cause of death. As we eliminate the other two causes it will become the number one killer.

There are many reasons why we age and die, but in principle there is no reason why each of those factors cannot be addressed.

Significantly extending the lives of human beings may be one of the most important breakthroughs we can make as a species. Many of the problems that we face are difficult to solve within a natural human lifespan.

Interstellar travel is one of these. Since its unclear if faster-than-light travel will ever be possible, the only other option that remains is to somehow endure the centuries in space. One way to do this is simply live longer.

Our relatively short lifespans also contribute to poor short-term decisions. Environmental problems such as global warming would bother people more if they thought theyd still be around in 100 or 200 years.

Why struggle with a biological body at all? Another strong current of thought in the transhumanism world suggests that we should become machines ourselves, either by becoming cyborgs with a mix of mechanical and biological parts or by uploading copies of our minds into robot bodies or virtual worlds.

This is one of the most radical examples of being transhuman becoming something wholly other than human.

Not content to just make us physically better or extend our lives as we are, transhumanism also means increasing our intelligence, both as individual people and as a species. How this will be achieved is an open question at this point. Already today we have a class of drugs known as nootropics that have a small but measurable effect.

Today we have a number of emerging brain implants that are used for rehabilitation, but in the future brain implants may add abilities to the brain that it did not have before. Imagine being able to do mathematical calculations or learning any skill in an instant. As research on the neural language of the brain continues well see more and more direct-implant brain augmentations. For example, in 2016 Bryan Johnsons company Kernel raised $100m to develop an intelligence-boosting chip.

Of course, long before that its likely that well have direct brain interfaces that will allow us to communicate with computers using nothing but the power of our brains. Direct stimulation of the visual cortex or optic nerves could pave the way to augmented and virtual reality without any external electronics.

These are just some of the ideas that have come from the transhumanist movement over the years. The different applications, technologies, and fields of science are impossibly broad. But, they all still center around this one idea that human beings can be more than they are and only we have the power to change our own fate.

When did this school of thought begin? Its hard to say, since the idea of transcendence is as old as humanity itself. Virtually all cultures have some idea that when we die or when we do certain things we become more than human. There are lots of legends where normal human beings become deified or somehow become something more, or other, than human.

The key difference is that transhumanism tells us that we can use technology to transcend our humanity. This is something that probably first emerged in science fiction in the 20th century, but actual scientists were also in on the idea from an early stage. Its a logical progression of thought once we can cure heart disease, what about hearts that never get sick? What about a heart that can pump twice as well?

While a long list of people have contributed to transhumanist thought, there are a few names that you should take note of if you really want to get into this field in a meaningful way.

The first person who has to be on such a list is not one of the earliest or even most important transhumanist thinkers. He is, however, one of the most readable ones and hes probably done the most to make the public aware of transhumanism. That person is Raymond Kurzweil.

Yes, thats the same Kurzweil from the company that makes music equipment and pioneered early voice-recognition technology. Kurzweil has written several books on transhumanism that soberly looks at the present and future of the technologies that underlie the movement.

Other notables include aging expert Aubrey de Grey, nanotech expert Eric Drexler, bioethicist George Dvorsky, and Hans Moravec. Not all of these people would label themselves as transhumanists, but their work and writing definitely plays an important role in transhumanist thought as a whole.

Asking what transhumanism is differs from asking what it means to see yourself as transhumanist.

First and foremost, before any of the technology stuff applies, transhumanism is a form of humanism. Many of the values humanism espouses are also present in transhumanism, they just apply to more than just human beings.

Transhumanism is more concerned with beings of a humanlike or greater intelligence level. In many transhumanist texts youll read about personhood and how an AI or a genetically-engineered animal may be smart enough to qualify for it. Many transhumanists may be bothered by the treatment of highly-intelligent animals such as chimpanzees and dolphins.

Equality, freedom of choice, freedom of thought, and an overall striving for the maximum well-being of all intelligences play a central role in much of transhumanism. In other words, someone who is pro-human augmentation but does not have any of these values doesnt really qualify as a transhumanist.

In addition to this, transhumanism also demonstrates other humanist values such as a lack of belief in the supernatural, a belief in moral capacity, and trust in logic and reason. To be a transhumanist means taking these values and striving to express them at their best, using science and technology.

Transhumanism has often been accused of being an irrational, almost religious movement for smart people. Its utopian and unrealistic, they say. These critics of course miss one of the fundamental facts about transhumanists. Transhumanist dont have dogma or an absolute belief in their desires coming true. There is no guarantee that any of the ways transhumanism thinks the world ought to be is how the world will be. However, to pursue a goal you have to define a goal.

There are many opponents to the ideas in transhumanism. Some people believe that humans should stay within the limitations of human biology and psychology. There are very good logical and philosophical arguments for this and we all should read them, but in general this opposition is driven by emotion and constrained thinking.

The rest of this site isnt going to deal much with the philosophy of transhumanism, but more with all the cool things being created that could make a transhumanist future a reality. So even if you dont agree with all or even any transhumanist ideas, you should still feel welcome to explore every inch of this site if you have any interest in the technologies themselves.What matters is that you allow your imagination to go where we ourselves cannot or will not yet go.

Read this article:
Transhumanism - The Next Step to Super Humans?

Posted in Transhumanist | Comments Off on Transhumanism – The Next Step to Super Humans?

Transhumanist politics – Wikipedia

Posted: April 12, 2019 at 11:50 pm

Transhumanist politics constitutes a group of political ideologies that generally express the belief in improving human individuals through science and technology.

The term "transhumanism" with its present meaning was popularised by Julian Huxley's 1957 essay of that name.[1]

Natasha Vita-More was elected as a Councilperson for the 28th Senatorial District of Los Angeles in 1992. She ran with the Green Party, but on a personal platform of "transhumanism". She quit after a year, saying her party was "too neurotically geared toward environmentalism".[2][3]

James Hughes identifies the "neoliberal" Extropy Institute, founded by philosopher Max More and developed in the 1990s, as the first organized advocates for transhumanism. And he identifies the late-1990s formation of the World Transhumanist Association (WTA), a European organization which later was renamed to Humanity+ (H+), as partly a reaction to the free market perspective of the "Extropians". Per Hughes, "[t]he WTA included both social democrats and neoliberals around a liberal democratic definition of transhumanism, codified in the Transhumanist Declaration."[4][5] Hughes has also detailed the political currents in transhumanism, particularly the shift around 2009 from socialist transhumanism to libertarian and anarcho-capitalist transhumanism.[5] He claims that the left was pushed out of the World Transhumanist Association Board of Directors, and that libertarians and Singularitarians have secured a hegemony in the transhumanism community with help from Peter Thiel, but Hughes remains optimistic about a techno-progressive future.[5]

In 2012, the Longevity Party, a movement described as "100% transhumanist" by cofounder Maria Konovalenko,[6] began to organize in Russia for building a balloted political party.[7] Another Russian programme, the 2045 Initiative was founded in 2012 by billionaire Dmitry Itskov with its own "Evolution 2045" political party advocating life extension and android avatars.[8][9]

Writing for H+ Magazine in July 2014, futurist Peter Rothman called Gabriel Rothblatt "very possibly the first openly transhumanist political candidate in the United States" when he ran as a candidate for the United States Congress.[10]

In October 2014, Zoltan Istvan announced that he would be running in the 2016 United States presidential election under the banner of the "Transhumanist Party."[11] By May 2018, the Party had nearly 880 members, and chairmanship had been given to Gennady Stolyarov II.[12] Other groups using the name "Transhumanist Party" exist in the United Kingdom[13][14][15] and Germany.[16]

According to a 2006 study by the European Parliament, transhumanism is the political expression of the ideology that technology should be used to enhance human abilities.[17]

According to Amon Twyman of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET), political philosophies which support transhumanism include social futurism, techno-progressivism, techno-libertarianism, and anarcho-transhumanism.[18] Twyman considers such philosophies to collectively constitute political transhumanism.[18]

Techno-progressives also known as Democratic transhumanists,[19][20] support equal access to human enhancement technologies in order to promote social equality and prevent technologies from furthering the divide among socioeconomic classes.[21] However, libertarian transhumanist Ronald Bailey is critical of the democratic transhumanism described by James Hughes.[22][23] Jeffrey Bishop wrote that the disagreements among transhumanists regarding individual and community rights is "precisely the tension that philosophical liberalism historically tried to negotiate," but that disagreeing entirely with a posthuman future is a disagreement with the right to choose what humanity will become.[24] Woody Evans has supported placing posthuman rights in a continuum with animal rights and human rights.[25]

Riccardo Campa wrote that transhumanism can be coupled with many different political, philosophical, and religious views, and that this diversity can be an asset so long as transhumanists do not give priority to existing affiliations over membership with organized transhumanism.[26]

Some transhumanists question the use of politicizing transhumanism.[who?] Truman Chen of the Stanford Political Journal considers many transhumanist ideals to be anti-political.[27]

Democratic transhumanism, a term coined by James Hughes in 2002, refers to the stance of transhumanists (advocates for the development and use of human enhancement technologies) who espouse liberal, social, and/or radical democratic political views.[28][29][30][31]

According to Hughes, the ideology "stems from the assertion that human beings will generally be happier when they take rational control of the natural and social forces that control their lives."[29][32]The ethical foundation of democratic transhumanism rests upon rule utilitarianism and non-anthropocentric personhood theory.[33] Democratic transhumanist support equal access to human enhancement technologies in order to promote social equality and to prevent technologies from furthering the divide among the socioeconomic classes.[34]While raising objections both to right-wing and left-wing bioconservatism, and libertarian transhumanism, Hughes aims to encourage democratic transhumanists and their potential progressive allies to unite as a new social movement and influence biopolitical public policy.[29][31]

An attempt to expand the middle ground between technorealism and techno-utopianism, democratic transhumanism can be seen as a radical form of techno-progressivism.[35] Appearing several times in Hughes' work, the term "radical" (from Latin rdx, rdc-, root) is used as an adjective meaning of or pertaining to the root or going to the root. His central thesis is that emerging technologies and radical democracy can help citizens overcome some of the root causes of inequalities of power.[29]

According to Hughes, the terms techno-progressivism and democratic transhumanism both refer to the same set of Enlightenment values and principles; however, the term technoprogressive has replaced the use of the word democratic transhumanism.[36][37]

Hughes has identified 15 "left futurist" or "left techno-utopian" trends and projects that could be incorporated into democratic transhumanism:

These are notable individuals who have identified themselves, or have been identified by Hughes, as advocates of democratic transhumanism:[38]

Science journalist Ronald Bailey wrote a review of Citizen Cyborg in his online column for Reason magazine in which he offered a critique of democratic transhumanism and a defense of libertarian transhumanism.[22][23]

Critical theorist Dale Carrico defended democratic transhumanism from Bailey's criticism.[39] However, he would later criticize democratic transhumanism himself on technoprogressive grounds.[40]

Libertarian transhumanism is a political ideology synthesizing libertarianism and transhumanism.[28][41][42]Self-identified libertarian transhumanists, such as Ronald Bailey of Reason magazine and Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit, are advocates of the asserted "right to human enhancement" who argue that the free market is the best guarantor of this right, claiming that it produces greater prosperity and personal freedom than other economic systems.[43][44]

Libertarian transhumanists believe that the principle of self-ownership is the most fundamental idea from which both libertarianism and transhumanism stem. They are rational egoists and ethical egoists who embrace the prospect of using emerging technologies to enhance human capacities, which they believe stems from the self-interested application of reason and will in the context of the individual freedom to achieve a posthuman state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity. They extend this rational and ethical egoism to advocate a form of "biolibertarianism".[43]

As strong civil libertarians, libertarian transhumanists hold that any attempt to limit or suppress the asserted right to human enhancement is a violation of civil rights and civil liberties. However, as strong economic libertarians, they also reject proposed public policies of government-regulated and -insured human enhancement technologies, which are advocated by democratic transhumanists, because they fear that any state intervention will steer or limit their choices.[45][46][23]

Extropianism, the earliest current of transhumanist thought defined in 1988 by philosopher Max More, initially included an anarcho-capitalist interpretation of the concept of "spontaneous order" in its principles, which states that a free market economy achieves a more efficient allocation of societal resources than any planned or mixed economy could achieve. In 2000, while revising the principles of Extropy, More seemed to be abandoning libertarianism in favor of modern liberalism and anticipatory democracy. However, many Extropians remained libertarian transhumanists.[28]

Critiques of the techno-utopianism of libertarian transhumanists from progressive cultural critics include Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron's 1995 essay The Californian Ideology; Mark Dery's 1996 book Escape Velocity: Cyberculture at the End of the Century; and Paulina Borsook's 2000 book Cyberselfish: A Critical Romp Through the Terribly Libertarian Culture of High-Tech.

Barbrook argues that libertarian transhumanists are proponents of the Californian Ideology who embrace the goal of reactionary modernism: economic growth without social mobility.[47] According to Barbrook, libertarian transhumanists are unwittingly appropriating the theoretical legacy of Stalinist communism by substituting, among other concepts, the "vanguard party" with the "digerati", and the "new Soviet man" with the "posthuman".[48] Dery coined the dismissive phrase "body-loathing" to describe the attitude of libertarian transhumanists and those in the cyberculture who want to escape from their "meat puppet" through mind uploading into cyberspace.[49] Borsook asserts that libertarian transhumanists indulge in a subculture of selfishness, elitism, and escapism.[50]

Sociologist James Hughes is the most militant critic of libertarian transhumanism. While articulating "democratic transhumanism" as a sociopolitical program in his 2004 book Citizen Cyborg,[31] Hughes sought to convince libertarian transhumanists to embrace social democracy by arguing that:

Klaus-Gerd Giesen, a German political scientist specializing in the philosophy of technology, wrote a critique of the libertarianism he imputes to all transhumanists. While pointing out that the works of Austrian School economist Friedrich Hayek figure in practically all of the recommended reading lists of Extropians, he argues that transhumanists, convinced of the sole virtues of the free market, advocate an unabashed inegalitarianism and merciless meritocracy which can be reduced in reality to a biological fetish. He is especially critical of their promotion of a science-fictional liberal eugenics, virulently opposed to any political regulation of human genetics, where the consumerist model presides over their ideology. Giesen concludes that the despair of finding social and political solutions to today's sociopolitical problems incites transhumanists to reduce everything to the hereditary gene, as a fantasy of omnipotence to be found within the individual, even if it means transforming the subject (human) to a new draft (posthuman).[51]

Read more from the original source:
Transhumanist politics - Wikipedia

Posted in Transhumanist | Comments Off on Transhumanist politics – Wikipedia

Christian Transhumanist Conference 2018 Tickets, Sat, Aug …

Posted: March 29, 2019 at 1:45 am

Science is increasingly challenging our understanding of what it means to be human. Brain Implants, Artificial Intelligence, Radical Life Extension, Space Exploration, and Genetic Engineering billions are being poured into these efforts, shaped by ongoing conversations about humanity's future.

Another war between faith & science?

Or an opportunity for Science, Faith & Technology to work together to create a better future?

Aubrey de Grey is a life extension advocate and radical longevity researcher, working to end aging and create biological immortality through science. How will biological immortality impact our understanding of Humanity? How will it impact Faith? Is the pursuit of immortality a moral necessityor a sin? Will it fulfill the age-old dreams of religion?

Ted Peters is a Lutheran theologian and Professor of Systematic Theology at Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary. He is author of GODThe Worlds Future (Fortress 2000) and Science, Theology, and Ethics (Ashgate 2003). He serves as editor of Theology and Science, by the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences in Berkeley.

J. Jeanine Thweatt holds a Ph.D. in Theology and Science from Princeton Theological Seminary, and has taught at Princeton Theological Seminary, New Brunswick Theological Seminary, and Flagler College. She is the author of Cyborg Selves: A Theological Anthropology of the Posthuman.

Scott Hawley is Associate Professor of Physics at Belmont University, and a computational physicist and machine learning app developer. He spent the summer in Oxford on a Templeton-funded grant for the project "Christian Responses to the Ascendancy of Artificial Intelligence".

Derek Webb is a folk musician from Nashville, TN, who will be perfoming selections from CTRL, an A.I.-based concept album.

https://www.christiantranshumanism.org/conference#schedule

Lipscomb UniversityEzell CenterRoom 363

Google Map

https://www.christiantranshumanism.org/conference#directions

Belmont Blvd & Allen Arena West (Google Map Directions). From the entrance on Belmont Blvd (NOT the main University entrance), park in the Allen Arena West Parking Garage. Walk out of the garage, across the roundabout, past the construction, and take the walkway to the Ezell Center. Inside the Ezell Center entrance, take the first elevator on your left, and go to the third floor. Follow signs to room.

Granny White & Allen Arena East (Google Map Directions). From the Granny White Pike entrance, park in the Allen Arena East Parking Garage. Walk past Allen Arena to the Ezell Center. Inside the Ezell Center entrance, take the first elevator on your left, and go to the third floor. Follow signs to room.

Right after lunch, we're having breakout discussions on the topics you choose. Add your topics, and vote on other topicsin this poll:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/ChristianTranshumanistAssociation/permalink/1070115786496013

For more information on Christian Transhumanism, and our mission to work against illness, hunger, oppression, injustice, and death, visit our webpage at http://www.christiantranshumanism.org.

We look forward to seeing you in Nashville in August!

More:
Christian Transhumanist Conference 2018 Tickets, Sat, Aug ...

Posted in Transhumanist | Comments Off on Christian Transhumanist Conference 2018 Tickets, Sat, Aug …

Nanochips & Smart Dust: New Face of the Human …

Posted: March 29, 2019 at 1:45 am

The human microchipping agenda has a new face: Nanochips & Smart Dust. What are they? Are you being set up to be a node on the grid? What can you do?

are the new technological means for the advancement of the human microchipping agenda. Due to their incredibly tiny size, both nanochips and Smart dust have the capacity to infiltrate the human body, become lodged within, and begin to set up a synthetic network on the inside which can be remotely controlled from the outside. Needless to say, this has grave freedom, privacy and health implications, because it means the New World Order would be moving from controlling the outside world (environment/society) to controlling the inside world (your body). This article explores what the advent of nanochips and Smart dust could mean for you.

Humanitys history is filled with examples of societies where the people were sharply divided into 2 categories: rulers and slaves.In the distant past, the slaves have usually been kept in place because the rulers had access to and control over the resources, such as money, food, water, weapons or other necessities of life (control of the environment).In our more recent history, control was implemented not only by monopolizing resources but also via propaganda (control of the mind). This has manifested itself in many ways, e.g. the caste system in India (you must remain in your position on the hierarchical ladder for life), the royal bloodlines in Rome, the Middle East and Europe (who claimed an inherent and divine right to rule), the centralization of power in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia during the 1930s (where a single autocrat or a small committee decided the fate of millions), and finally in the West (especially in the US) with the advent of specialized PR and mind control techniques that were refined by the CIA. Projects like MKUltra gave the NWO controllers unheard of power to remotely and subconsciously influence people without them ever knowing, including the ability to create sex slaves and sleeper assassins.

Project MKUltra was at its height 60+ years ago, and things have moved on a lot since then. We are now entering an era where technological advancements are giving the NWO conspirators influence over a new realm control of the emotions, or more accurately, control over the entire mind-emotion nexus in the human body. I am talking about microchips, tiny electronic devices which can be embedded under your skin, and which receive and transmit information. Although microchips have been around awhile, they are now outdated. What we are facing is something much tinier than a microchip, and therefore much more of a threat: nanochips and smart dust.

The components of a Smart dust sensor or mote. Image credit: CatchUpdates.com

So what is ananochip? The word nano is 3 orders of magnitude smaller than micro. Nano means one billionth while micro means one millionth. While microchips are about the size of a grain of rice and measured in millimeters, nanochips are completely invisible to the human eye. Some nanochips are far smaller than human hair (e.g. the -chip that is 0.4 x 0.4 mm). In 2015, IBM announced thatthey had developed functional nanochips measuring just 7 nm or nanometers (7 billionths of 1 meter). In comparison, a strand of human DNA is about 2.5 nm and the diameter of a single red blood cell is about 7500 nm! These nanochips power themselves from their environment (they dont need batteries) and have a 100 year life span. They are slated to be rolled out first on products (so the corporatocracy can have total knowledge of consumer behavior in real time) before they can be used inside peoples bodies. Did you know that nerve cells grow onto/meld with the chip?

In this Leak Project video, the presenter claims that the NWO aimto introduce 100 trillion nanochips into the world, so that literally every single thing in the world is tagged, including you. He includes many patents and other docs as proof of this agenda. He singles out the company HP (Hewlett Packard) as being the executor of the plan to construct a synthetic central nervous system for the Earth linking all resources and people in real time.

Smart dust. Image credit: Waking Times

You may already be familiar with the Smart agenda or better put the Smart Deception. For those new to this, the Smart agenda is to create a giant electromagnetic grid or network that encompasses the entire Earth. Everything that moves is to be made or injected with some kind of sensor or motethat connects it to the grid including household products, appliances, food/drink items, animals, plants and humans too. Smart dust is another name for these motes which will act as mini computers, broadcasting and receiving. They aresmall wireless microelectromechanical sensors (MEMS). As of 2013, a mote was about the size of a grain of rice, but with technology advancing all the time, these will keep on reducing in size. Motes can be ingested through food (as will be discussed below).

The Smart agenda is basically synonymous with the UN Agenda 21 or Agenda 2030, and the Smart grid is synonymous with the IoT (Internet of Things) which is also going to use the new 5G network to achieve its desired saturation levels.

While this kind of technology can be used for the benefit of mankind, like many things today, it has been weaponized. The existence of smart dust forms a massive threat against the sovereignty of every human being alive. What we are up against is nothing less than the attempted technological possession of humanity.

In a fundamental way, vaccines, GMOs, bioengineered food and geoengineering/chemtrails are all connected, as they are delivery systems whereby this miniature technology of nanochips and Smart dust is planned to be inserted into our bodies. Some chemtrails contain Smart dust motes which readily infiltrate the body, communicate with other motes in your body, set up their own network and which can, unfortunately, be remotely controlled.Even if you are fastidious about what you eat and what you expose yourself to, it is difficult to see how you can avoid breathing in a mote of smart dust that was dropped on you by a plane spraying chemtrails.

With nanochips and motes inside your body, the NWO criminals can combine the IoT smart grid with brain mapping and other technological information in their attempt to pull off their ultimate endgame: to remotely influence and control an entire population by overriding (and programming) the thoughts, feelings and actions of the masses.

(The rabbit hole definitely does not stop at nanochips and Smart dust. An entire new category of lifeforms are being forged via synthetic biology.Morgellons fibers are self-aware, self-replicating and are likely assisting the dark agenda to remotely control the thoughts, feelings and bodily functions of the entire population. This will be explored in other articles.)

Naturally, the full scope and goal of this agenda will not be revealed to the public as the technology is rolled out. Instead, we will continue to be told how wonderful, cool, trendy and efficient it all is. Note especially how all of this will be promoted under the banner of speed and convenience (while people unwittingly flush their freedom, health and privacy down the toilet). Yes, being surrounded by fields of manmade EM radiation everywhere you go will be disastrous for your health too.

The nanochips will also be pushed using peer pressure, encouraging people to get in the game out of social conformity. Like many governmental programs, the chips may initially be voluntary before they become mandatory. There is already a segment of society that is willingly chipping itself using tattoo ink. Recently, a company in Wisconsin (Three Square Market or 32M) introduced such an internal system and began encouraging its employees to get chipped. Although it was not mandatory, reportedly about half of them (41 out of 85) stepped forward and chose to get chipped!

So what can you do about this? Firstly, get informed and make sure you understand the true nature and danger of nanochip and smart technology. Secondly, make sure you never acquiesce to getting chipped, no matter what reason youre given. Doing so is tantamount to opening yourself to being remotely controlled without your knowledge. Thirdly, if you do discover a chip inside your body, get it removed. There are various ways to do. Some people crudely cut the chips out if they are large enough (i.e. a microchip instead of a nanochip). Other people claim you can used magnets such as neodymium magnets to render the nanochips useless. Hopefully, there will be intelligent inventors to step forward with new technologies that we can use to deactivate, disable and remove nanochips inside of our bodies.

The human microchipping agenda is really the same thing as the transhumanist agenda to turn mankind into machine which will ultimately mean becoming not superhuman but subhuman.

We need to be very careful and think critically as we go forward into a world of fantastic technology. Like the surgeons knife, it can heal or it can kill. Given everything we know, it would be nave to believe that nanochips will only be used for good. If were not aware, this technology will be used by the power-hungry to enslave us by tricking us with promises of utopia. Nanobots are already being used in Western medicine for all sorts of diseases. Once the smart grid is established, how will you avoid being monitored, tracked and influenced 24/7 every day of the year?

No matter how good the technology becomes, it can never replace the spirit of consciousness inside of you, which is your true power.

*****

Want the latest commentaryand analysis on Conspiracy, Health, Geopolitics, Sovereignty, Consciousness and more? Sign up forfree blog updates!

Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative news / independent media siteThe Freedom Articlesand senior researcher atToolsForFreedom.com(FaceBookhere), writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwideconspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.

Sources:

*http://www.newsweek.com/nano-chipnanochips7nm-chipnanotechnologymacbookiphone-6ibmmoore039s-law-602458

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5OeZWfRhhs

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/smart-deception/

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/agenda-21-human-habitat/

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/5g-iot-technological-control-grid/

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-svcCIDvvk

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/people-voluntarily-chipping-themselves/

*http://www.chicagotribune.com/bluesky/technology/ct-wisconsin-company-microchips-workers-20170801-story.html

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FEWrnPHFPw

*http://www.thetruthdenied.com/news/2014/11/11/how-to-remove-an-rfid-implant/comment-page-1/

See more here:
Nanochips & Smart Dust: New Face of the Human ...

Posted in Transhumanist | Comments Off on Nanochips & Smart Dust: New Face of the Human …

Yudkowsky – Simplified Humanism

Posted: March 18, 2019 at 9:45 pm

Frank Sulloway once said: Ninety-nine per cent of what Darwinian theory says about human behavior is so obviously true that we dont give Darwin credit for it. Ironically, psychoanalysis has it over Darwinism precisely because its predictions are so outlandish and its explanations are so counterintuitive that we think, Is that really true? How radical! Freuds ideas are so intriguing that people are willing to pay for them, while one of the great disadvantages of Darwinism is that we feel we know it already, because, in a sense, we do.

Suppose you find an unconscious six-year-old girl lying on the train tracks of an active railroad. What, morally speaking, ought you to do in this situation? Would it be better to leave her there to get run over, or to try to save her? How about if a 45-year-old man has a debilitating but nonfatal illness that will severely reduce his quality of life is it better to cure him, or not cure him?

Oh, and by the way: This is not a trick question.

I answer that I would save them if I had the power to do so both the six-year-old on the train tracks, and the sick 45-year-old. The obvious answer isnt always the best choice, but sometimes it is.

I wont be lauded as a brilliant ethicist for my judgments in these two ethical dilemmas. My answers are not surprising enough that people would pay me for them. If you go around proclaiming What does two plus two equal? Four! you will not gain a reputation as a deep thinker. But it is still the correct answer.

If a young child falls on the train tracks, it is good to save them, and if a 45-year-old suffers from a debilitating disease, it is good to cure them. If you have a logical turn of mind, you are bound to ask whether this is a special case of a general ethical principle which says Life is good, death is bad; health is good, sickness is bad. If so and here we enter into controversial territory we can follow this general principle to a surprising new conclusion: If a 95-year-old is threatened by death from old age, it would be good to drag them from those train tracks, if possible. And if a 120-year-old is starting to feel slightly sickly, it would be good to restore them to full vigor, if possible. With current technology it is not possible. But if the technology became available in some future year given sufficiently advanced medical nanotechnology, or such other contrivances as future minds may devise would you judge it a good thing, to save that life, and stay that debility?

The important thing to remember, which I think all too many people forget, is that it is not a trick question.

Transhumanism is simpler requires fewer bits to specify because it has no special cases. If you believe professional bioethicists (people who get paid to explain ethical judgments) then the rule Life is good, death is bad; health is good, sickness is bad holds only until some critical age, and then flips polarity. Why should it flip? Why not just keep on with life-is-good? It would seem that it is good to save a six-year-old girl, but bad to extend the life and health of a 150-year-old. Then at what exact age does the term in the utility function go from positive to negative? Why?

As far as a transhumanist is concerned, if you see someone in danger of dying, you should save them; if you can improve someones health, you should. There, youre done. No special cases. You dont have to ask anyones age.

You also dont ask whether the remedy will involve only primitive technologies (like a stretcher to lift the six-year-old off the railroad tracks); or technologies invented less than a hundred years ago (like penicillin) which nonetheless seem ordinary because they were around when you were a kid; or technologies that seem scary and sexy and futuristic (like gene therapy) because they were invented after you turned 18; or technologies that seem absurd and implausible and sacrilegious (like nanotech) because they havent been invented yet. Your ethical dilemma report form doesnt have a line where you write down the invention year of the technology. Can you save lives? Yes? Okay, go ahead. There, youre done.

Suppose a boy of 9 years, who has tested at IQ 120 on the Wechsler-Bellvue, is threatened by a lead-heavy environment or a brain disease which will, if unchecked, gradually reduce his IQ to 110. I reply that it is a good thing to save him from this threat. If you have a logical turn of mind, you are bound to ask whether this is a special case of a general ethical principle saying that intelligence is precious. Now the boys sister, as it happens, currently has an IQ of 110. If the technology were available to gradually raise her IQ to 120, without negative side effects, would you judge it good to do so?

Well, of course. Why not? Its not a trick question. Either its better to have an IQ of 110 than 120, in which case we should strive to decrease IQs of 120 to 110. Or its better to have an IQ of 120 than 110, in which case we should raise the sisters IQ if possible. As far as I can see, the obvious answer is the correct one.

But you ask where does it end? It may seem well and good to talk about extending life and health out to 150 years but what about 200 years, or 300 years, or 500 years, or more? What about when in the course of properly integrating all these new life experiences and expanding ones mind accordingly over time the equivalent of IQ must go to 140, or 180, or beyond human ranges?

Where does it end? It doesnt. Why should it? Life is good, health is good, beauty and happiness and fun and laughter and challenge and learning are good. This does not change for arbitrarily large amounts of life and beauty. If there were an upper bound, it would be a special case, and that would be inelegant.

Ultimate physical limits may or may not permit a lifespan of at least length X for some X just as the medical technology of a particular century may or may not permit it. But physical limitations are questions of simple fact, to be settled strictly by experiment. Transhumanism, as a moral philosophy, deals only with the question of whether a healthy lifespan of length X is desirable if it is physically possible. Transhumanism answers yes for all X. Because, you see, its not a trick question.

So that is transhumanism loving life without special exceptions and without upper bound.

Can transhumanism really be that simple? Doesnt that make the philosophy trivial, if it has no extra ingredients, just common sense? Yes, in the same way that the scientific method is nothing but common sense.

Then why have a complicated special name like transhumanism ? For the same reason that scientific method or secular humanism have complicated special names. If you take common sense and rigorously apply it, through multiple inferential steps, to areas outside everyday experience, successfully avoiding many possible distractions and tempting mistakes along the way, then it often ends up as a minority position and people give it a special name.

But a moral philosophy should not have special ingredients. The purpose of a moral philosophy is not to look delightfully strange and counterintuitive, or to provide employment to bioethicists. The purpose is to guide our choices toward life, health, beauty, happiness, fun, laughter, challenge, and learning. If the judgments are simple, that is no black mark against them morality doesnt always have to be complicated.

There is nothing in transhumanism but the same common sense that underlies standard humanism, rigorously applied to cases outside our modern-day experience. A million-year lifespan? If its possible, why not? The prospect may seem very foreign and strange, relative to our current everyday experience. It may create a sensation of future shock. And yet is life a bad thing?

Could the moral question really be just that simple?

Yes.

Originally posted here:
Yudkowsky - Simplified Humanism

Posted in Transhumanist | Comments Off on Yudkowsky – Simplified Humanism

FM-2030 – Wikipedia

Posted: March 18, 2019 at 9:45 pm

FM-2030

FM-2030 (October 15, 1930 July 8, 2000) was a Belgian-born Iranian-American author, teacher, transhumanist philosopher, futurist, consultant and athlete.[1] FM-2030 was born Fereidoun M. Esfandiary (Persian: ).

He became notable as a transhumanist with the book Are You a Transhuman?: Monitoring and Stimulating Your Personal Rate of Growth in a Rapidly Changing World, published in 1989. In addition, he wrote a number of works of fiction under his original name F.M. Esfandiary.

The son of an Iranian diplomat, he travelled widely as a child, living in 17 countries by age 11; then, as a young man, he represented Iran as a basketball player at the 1948 Olympic Games in London[2] and served on the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine from 1952 to 1954.[3]

In the mid-1970s F.M. Esfandiary legally[2] changed his name to FM-2030 for two main reasons. Firstly, to reflect the hope and belief that he would live to celebrate his 100th birthday in 2030; secondly, and more importantly, to break free of the widespread practice of naming conventions that he saw as rooted in a collectivist mentality, and existing only as a relic of humankind's tribalistic past. He viewed traditional names as almost always stamping a label of collective identity - varying from gender to nationality - on the individual, thereby existing as prima facie elements of thought processes in the human cultural fabric, that tended to degenerate into stereotyping, factionalism, and discrimination. In his own words, "Conventional names define a person's past: ancestry, ethnicity, nationality, religion. I am not who I was ten years ago and certainly not who I will be in twenty years. [...] The name 2030 reflects my conviction that the years around 2030 will be a magical time. In 2030 we will be ageless and everyone will have an excellent chance to live forever. 2030 is a dream and a goal."[4]

He was a lifelong vegetarian and said he would not eat anything that had a mother.[5] FM-2030 once said, "I am a 21st century person who was accidentally launched in the 20th. I have a deep nostalgia for the future."[6] He taught at The New School, University of California, Los Angeles, and Florida International University.[1] He worked as a corporate consultant for Lockheed and J. C. Penney.[1] He was also an atheist.[7]Fereidoun was, in his own words, a follower of "upwing" politics, in which he meant that he endorsed universal progress.[8][9]

On July 8, 2000, FM-2030 died from pancreatic cancer and was placed in cryonic suspension at the Alcor Life Extension Foundation in Scottsdale, Arizona, where his body remains today. He did not yet have remote standby arrangements, so no Alcor team member was present at his death, but FM-2030 was the first person to be vitrified, rather than simply frozen as previous cryonics patients had been.[5] FM-2030 was survived by four sisters and one brother.[2]

Go here to see the original:
FM-2030 - Wikipedia

Posted in Transhumanist | Comments Off on FM-2030 – Wikipedia

Space Fence: Connecting the Surveillance and Transhumanist …

Posted: March 18, 2019 at 9:45 pm

The Space Fence is not just to track and catalog space debris. Its an overarching program that connects the geoengineering, surveillance and transhumanist and AI agendas.

is a massive, planetary-wide, space surveillance system currently being constructed that aims to monitor you all the way down to your DNA. Officially, the Space Fenceis, according to Wikipedia, a 2nd generation space surveillance system being built (started in 2014) by the US Air Force and Lockheed Martin to track artificial satellites and space debris. Itsbudget is US$1.594 billion, its expected to be operational in 2019and the Space Fence facility will be located in the MarshallIslands along with an option for another radar site in Western Australia. The Space Fence is a resurrection of a program started by Reagan in the 1980s called SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative), commonly known by its nickname Star Wars.However, like many exotic weapons of the New World Order, it has a cover purpose and a real purpose. This article exposes the grander implications of the Space Fence and how it connects to other technology that could be used to enslave you.

Although the USAF and Lockheed Martin tell us that the purpose of the Space Fence is to detect, track and catalog space debris, we must acknowledge that the MIC (Military Intelligence Complex) is at the helm of the New World Order and is routinely engaged in psychological operations against the rest of the population. The Space Fence is the answer to the prayers of a control-freak conspiratorial class. It will have the capacityto surveil everything on Earth. Like Skynet in the fictional Terminator films, it could becomesurveillance beyond comprehension. How?The Space Fence is designed to operate inLEO (Low Earth Orbit). It isdesigned to be one big interconnected machine, run by AI and joined to current (weaponized) technology by interacting with cell phone towers, Gwen Towers, Nexrad Towers, metal particulates and more to create a giant wireless network that manipulates us through the ionization of our atmosphere.

According to Elena Freeland, author ofChemtrails, HAARP, and the Full Spectrum Dominance of Planet Earthwho is soon to release a book on the topic, the Space Fence will eventually develop into a conductive Saturnian ring around the Earths equator. From there, it could be used to facilitate a complete lockdown on planetary communications (including our DNA communications, since we are electrical creatures), in line with the MICs C4 objectives (Command, Control, Communications and Computers). Freeland states that the Space Fence will have the power to totally transform the entire environment of the planet. It thus is a tool of the AI/Transhumanist agenda to merge man into machine.

Everyone loves the acronym of HAARP but it was just one installation/project. These days its more accurate to call these weapons ionospheric heaters. According to HAARP insider Billy Hayes, there are 200+ of them worldwide.

The Space Fence seems to tie many aspects of the worldwide conspiracy together. Two aspects to pay attention to are ionization and conductivity. To ionize is to create polarity within a substrate. Some things are naturally non-ionized, so to ionize them is take them out of their natural state. To make something conductive is to change it so that it can conduct electricity. The NWO controllers have been unleashing a torrent of light and heavy metals (aluminum, barium, strontium and more) into our environment and thus into our bodies for decades via industrial output, chemical-laden products, vaccines and chemtrails.

Ionization and conductivity crop up again and again when investigating the Space Fence. Thereason the NWO conspirators are so obsessed with these concepts is because they have weaponized them. Ionization is linked to weather control. Ionospheric heaters (the most famous of which is HAARP) are now deployed around the world to heat and ionize layers of the atmosphere. Once ionized, it can be directed in line with geopolitical goals of the controllers, which can equate to earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis, floods and droughts. In 2014, we were told that HAARP was being shut down, however since HAARP-like technology is the ultimate weapon of the globalists, does anyone in their right mind really think they are just going to give it away due to lack of funding or because they are supposedly finished with it? Former HAARP insider Billy Hayes (who worked on constructing the original installation in Gakona, Alaska) claims there are over 200 HAARP-like facilities around the world which are fully operational.

Conductivity is linked to both mind control and holographic manipulation (a la Project Bluebeam). It is theorized that, with nano metal particulates everywhere including inside of peoples bodies, the masses are easier to mind control, since the metals act as receivers of wireless transmissions. There is evidence that the more metal particulates in the air, the easier it is to projectholograms onto it (e.g. see the 36:30 minute mark of this Elena Freeland presentation). As this Leak Project video revealed, HP (Hewlett Packard) is literally releasing billions if not trillions of nano sensors (smart dust) into the environment. Is one of the purposes to prepare for a Project Bluebeam scenario?

A close up of a plasma ball, showing electrified plasma gas.

The ionization of our skies means that the air is transformed into plasma,the 4th state of matter. Plasma is defined as an ionized gas consisting of positive ions and free electrons in proportions resulting in more or less no overall electric charge, typically at low pressures (as in the upper atmosphere and in fluorescent lamps) or at very high temperatures (as in stars and nuclear fusion reactors). In simple terms, it isionized air. Plasma keeps our atmosphere thick. It is a medium where electrons can be moved around. Altered plasma means dramatic earth changes via the troposphere and magnetosphere.According to Freeland, the Space Fence will also ionize the outer part of our planet.

Was the SDI only put on hold until they worked how to ionize the atmosphere (see Bernard Eastlands patents for HAARP), then re-activated?

In this context, you can look at Space Fence as the controlling hub which is designed to capitalize upon and control the tremendous transforming and terraforming of our planet which is happening right before our eyes. How can inundating our world with billions of metal particulates, nano chips and smart dustpossibly be a good idea?

Chemtrails: one of several delivery systems. Fancy some black heavy metals for dinner?

The Space Fence is not only connected to HAARP; its also connected to geoengineering / chemtrails, GMOs and vaccines. How? Because all of these things are delivery systems by whichmetal nanoparticles are injected into our atmosphere, water, food, air and, in the end, our bodies. Look at chemtrails now coming out of ships as well as planes infusing the air with all sorts of toxic metals like aluminum, barium and strontium, as well as synthetic biological lifeforms. Look at GMOs all sprayed with toxic metallic and synthetic pesticides which invades our bodies. Look at vaccines the injection of aluminum, mercury and more straight into our bloodstreams.The net effect of all of this is to create one huge wireless metallicized network to surround, engulf and permeate us.

In conclusion, its vital to look just beyond the Space Fence project and see the bigger picture. The Space Fence involves absolute control over space, chemtrails, nanotechnology, terraforming, genetic alteration, transhumanism and AI. The endgame is to control our nervous systems and our very DNA. The question for an awakened humanity is now: what can we do to thwart this agenda?

*****

Want the latest commentaryand analysis on Conspiracy, Health, Geopolitics, Sovereignty, Consciousness and more? Sign up forfree blog updates!

Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative news / independent media siteThe Freedom Articlesand senior researcher atToolsForFreedom.com(FaceBookhere), writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwideconspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.

Sources:

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Fence

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RX3IOHpe6sY

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/geoengineering-haarp-and-chemtrails-ultimate-weapon-globalists/

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kQ_s_usST8

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSgZPwArtpk

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5OeZWfRhhs

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/nanochips-smart-dust-microchipping/

Originally posted here:
Space Fence: Connecting the Surveillance and Transhumanist ...

Posted in Transhumanist | Comments Off on Space Fence: Connecting the Surveillance and Transhumanist …

Biological immortality – Wikipedia

Posted: February 28, 2019 at 9:42 am

Biological immortality (sometimes referred to bio-indefinite mortality) is a state in which the rate of mortality from senescence is stable or decreasing, thus decoupling it from chronological age. Various unicellular and multicellular species, including some vertebrates, achieve this state either throughout their existence or after living long enough. A biologically immortal living being can still die from means other than senescence, such as through injury or disease.

This definition of immortality has been challenged in the Handbook of the Biology of Aging,[1] because the increase in rate of mortality as a function of chronological age may be negligible at extremely old ages, an idea referred to as the late-life mortality plateau. The rate of mortality may cease to increase in old age, but in most cases that rate is typically very high.[2] As a hypothetical example, there is only a 50% chance of a human surviving another year at age 110 or greater.

The term is also used by biologists to describe cells that are not subject to the Hayflick limit on how many times they can divide.

Biologists chose the word "immortal" to designate cells that are not subject to the Hayflick limit, the point at which cells can no longer divide due to DNA damage or shortened telomeres. Prior to Leonard Hayflick's theory, Alexis Carrel hypothesized that all normal somatic cells were immortal.[3]

The term "immortalization" was first applied to cancer cells that expressed the telomere-lengthening enzyme telomerase, and thereby avoided apoptosisi.e. cell death caused by intracellular mechanisms. Among the most commonly used cell lines are HeLa and Jurkat, both of which are immortalized cancer cell lines. HeLa cells originated from a sample of cervical cancer taken from Henrietta Lacks in 1951.[4] These cells have been and still are widely used in biological research such as creation of the polio vaccine,[5] sex hormone steroid research,[6] and cell metabolism.[7] Normal stem cells and germ cells can also be said to be immortal (when humans refer to the cell line).[citation needed]

Immortal cell lines of cancer cells can be created by induction of oncogenes or loss of tumor suppressor genes. One way to induce immortality is through viral-mediated induction of the large Tantigen,[8] commonly introduced through simian virus 40 (SV-40).[9]

According to the Animal Aging and Longevity Database, the list of organisms with negligible aging (along with estimated longevity in the wild) includes:[10]

In 2018, scientists working for Calico, a company owned by Alphabet, published a paper in the journal eLife which presents possible evidence that Heterocephalus glaber (Naked mole rat) do not face increased mortality risk due to aging.[12][13][14]

Many unicellular organisms age: as time passes, they divide more slowly and ultimately die. Asymmetrically dividing bacteria and yeast also age. However, symmetrically dividing bacteria and yeast can be biologically immortal under ideal growing conditions.[15] In these conditions, when a cell splits symmetrically to produce two daughter cells, the process of cell division can restore the cell to a youthful state. However, if the parent asymmetrically buds off a daughter only the daughter is reset to the youthful statethe parent isn't restored and will go on to age and die. In a similar manner stem cells and gametes can be regarded as "immortal".

Hydras are a genus of the Cnidaria phylum. All cnidarians can regenerate, allowing them to recover from injury and to reproduce asexually. Hydras are simple, freshwater animals possessing radial symmetry and no post-mitotic cells. All hydra cells continually divide.[citation needed] It has been suggested that hydras do not undergo senescence, and, as such, are biologically immortal. In a four-year study, 3 cohorts of hydra did not show an increase in mortality with age. It is possible that these animals live much longer, considering that they reach maturity in 5 to 10 days.[16] However, this does not explain how hydras are consequently able to maintain telomere lengths.

Turritopsis dohrnii, or Turritopsis nutricula, is a small (5 millimeters (0.20in)) species of jellyfish that uses transdifferentiation to replenish cells after sexual reproduction. This cycle can repeat indefinitely, potentially rendering it biologically immortal. This organism originated in the Caribbean sea, but has now spread around the world. Similar cases include hydrozoan Laodicea undulata[17] and scyphozoan Aurelia sp.1.[18]

Research suggests that lobsters may not slow down, weaken, or lose fertility with age, and that older lobsters may be more fertile than younger lobsters. This does not however make them immortal in the traditional sense, as they are significantly more likely to die at a shell moult the older they get (as detailed below).

Their longevity may be due to telomerase, an enzyme that repairs long repetitive sections of DNA sequences at the ends of chromosomes, referred to as telomeres. Telomerase is expressed by most vertebrates during embryonic stages but is generally absent from adult stages of life.[19] However, unlike vertebrates, lobsters express telomerase as adults through most tissue, which has been suggested to be related to their longevity.[20][21][22] Contrary to popular belief, lobsters are not immortal. Lobsters grow by moulting which requires a lot of energy, and the larger the shell the more energy is required.[23] Eventually, the lobster will die from exhaustion during a moult. Older lobsters are also known to stop moulting, which means that the shell will eventually become damaged, infected, or fall apart and they die.[24] The European lobster has an average life span of 31 years for males and 54 years for females.

Planarian flatworms have both sexually and asexually reproducing types. Studies on genus Schmidtea mediterranea suggest these planarians appear to regenerate (i.e. heal) indefinitely, and asexual individuals have an "apparently limitless [telomere] regenerative capacity fueled by a population of highly proliferative adult stem cells". "Both asexual and sexual animals display age-related decline in telomere length; however, asexual animals are able to maintain telomere lengths somatically (i.e. during reproduction by fission or when regeneration is induced by amputation), whereas sexual animals restore telomeres by extension during sexual reproduction or during embryogenesis like other sexual species. Homeostatic telomerase activity observed in both asexual and sexual animals is not sufficient to maintain telomere length, whereas the increased activity in regenerating asexuals is sufficient to renew telomere length... "[25]

Lifespan: For sexually reproducing planaria: "the lifespan of individual planarian can be as long as 3 years, likely due to the ability of neoblasts to constantly replace aging cells". Whereas for asexually reproducing planaria: "individual animals in clonal lines of some planarian species replicating by fission have been maintained for over 15 years".[26]They are "literally immortal."[27]

Although the premise that biological aging can be halted or reversed by foreseeable technology remains controversial,[28] research into developing possible therapeutic interventions is underway.[29] Among the principal drivers of international collaboration in such research is the SENS Research Foundation, a non-profit organization that advocates a number of what it claims are plausible research pathways that might lead to engineered negligible senescence in humans.[30][31]

In 2015, Elizabeth Parrish, CEO of BioViva, treated herself using gene therapy, with the goal of not just halting, but reversing aging.[32] She has since reported feeling more energetic, and no obvious negative side effects have been noticed.[33]

For several decades,[34] researchers have also pursued various forms of suspended animation as a means by which to indefinitely extend mammalian lifespan. Some scientists have voiced support[35] for the feasibility of the cryopreservation of humans, known as cryonics. Cryonics is predicated on the concept that some people considered clinically dead by today's medicolegal standards are not actually dead according to information-theoretic death and can, in principle, be resuscitated given sufficient technological advances.[36] The goal of current cryonics procedures is tissue vitrification, a technique first used to reversibly cryopreserve a viable whole organ in 2005.[37][38]

Similar proposals involving suspended animation include chemical brain preservation. The non-profit Brain Preservation Foundation offers a cash prize valued at over $100,000 for demonstrations of techniques that would allow for high-fidelity, long-term storage of a mammalian brain.[39]

In 2016, scientists at the Buck Institute for Research on Aging and the Mayo Clinic employed genetic and pharmacological approaches to ablate pro-aging senescent cells, extending healthy lifespan of mice by over 25%. The startup Unity Biotechnology is further developing this strategy in human clinical trials.[40]

In early 2017, Harvard scientists headed by biologist David Sinclair announced they have tested a metabolic precursor that increases NAD+ levels in mice and have successfully reversed the cellular aging process and can protect the DNA from future damage. "The old mouse and young mouse cells are indistinguishable", David was quoted. Human trials are to begin shortly in what the team expect is 6 months at Brigham and Women's Hospital, in Boston.[41]

To achieve the more limited goal of halting the increase in mortality rate with age, a solution must be found to the fact that any intervention to remove senescent cells that creates competition among cells will increase age-related mortality from cancer.[42]

In 2012 in Russia, and then in the United States, Israel, and the Netherlands, pro-immortality transhumanist political parties were launched.[43] They aim to provide political support to anti-aging and radical life extension research and technologies and want to ensure the fastest possibleand at the same time, the least disruptivesocietal transition to radical life extension, life without aging, and ultimately, immortality. They aim to make it possible to provide access to such technologies to the majority of people alive today.[44]

Future advances in nanomedicine could give rise to life extension through the repair of many processes thought to be responsible for aging. K. Eric Drexler, one of the founders of nanotechnology, postulated cell repair devices, including ones operating within cells and utilizing as yet hypothetical molecular machines, in his 1986 book Engines of Creation. Raymond Kurzweil, a futurist and transhumanist, stated in his book The Singularity Is Near that he believes that advanced medical nanorobotics could completely remedy the effects of aging by 2030.[45] According to Richard Feynman, it was his former graduate student and collaborator Albert Hibbs who originally suggested to him (circa 1959) the idea of a medical use for Feynman's theoretical micromachines (see biological machine). Hibbs suggested that certain repair machines might one day be reduced in size to the point that it would, in theory, be possible to (as Feynman put it) "swallow the doctor". The idea was incorporated into Feynman's 1959 essay There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom.[46]

Originally posted here:
Biological immortality - Wikipedia

Posted in Transhumanist | Comments Off on Biological immortality – Wikipedia

Transhumanism – Ascension Glossary

Posted: December 31, 2018 at 1:46 am

Transhumanism is an international, cultural and intellectual movement with an eventual goal of fundamentally transforming the human condition, by making available technologies that greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities. [1]Many transhumanists believe in the compatibility between the human mind and computer hardware, with the implication that human consciousness can be transferred to alternative media, known as mind uploading. Since the Science of the Soul and the Consciousness functions of the spiritual bodies, have not yet been discovered by scientists, this has potentially extremely destructive consequences to human consciousness and the electromagnetic functions of the Lightbody. Posthumans (the result of applied transhumanist technologies) could be completely synthetic artificial intelligences, or a symbiosis of human and artificial intelligence, or uploaded consciousness, or the result of making profound technological augmentations to a biological human.

Transhumanism is a school of thought that seeks to guide us towards a posthuman condition. Essentially, this is about creating artificially intelligent hybrids or cyborgs to replace the organic spiritual consciousness of humans. Some examples are redesigning the human organism using advanced nanotechnology or radical technological enhancements. Some of the proposed biological enhancements are using some combination of technologies such as genetic engineering, psychopharmacology, life extension therapies, neural interfaces, brain mapping, wearable or implanted computers, and entrainment of cognitive techniques. Most of these options are designed to disconnect the human soul from the human body, and prepare the body to be used as a shell for a new host. Effectively, this is integrating technological and pharmaceutical hybridization to damage human DNA, as preparation for body snatching.

The fundamental basis of the Transhumanism concept is the A.I. downloaded into the scientific human mind from the Negative Aliens and Satanic Forces, in their quest to survive and achieve immortality by hijacking human consciousness and ultimately possessing the human host body. They do not have flesh and bone bodies and covet ours. Most academics are filled with a variety of mind control and alien implants to be a cog in the wheel to steadily enforce alien control systems. Most early transhumanism concepts were developed by geneticists interested in eugenics and sustaining life forms in synthetic environments. (Like the eugenic experiments similar to those of the Black Sun Nazis). A common feature of promoting transhumanism is the future vision of creating a new intelligent species, into which humanity will evolve and eventually, either supplement it or supersede it. This distraction on the surface is a scheme, while the underlying motivation is intending species extinction of what we know as humans today. Transhumanism stresses the evolutionary perspective, yet it completely ignores the electromagnetic function of human DNA and the consciousness reality of the multidimensional human soul-spirit. They claim to want to stop human suffering but have no idea of the alien machinery and mind control implants used to imprison human consciousness. They know nothing about the afterlife, what happens during the death of the body or even how the human body or Universe really works, yet they want to control every aspect of the human body with artificial technology.

A primary goal of many transhumanists is to convince the public that embracing radical technology and science is in the human species best interest. With the False God Alien Religions used to spread the rhetoric of fear and mindless obedience on one end, and the primarily atheistic science used to mock all things religious without any comprehension of true spiritual understanding on the other, they have the bases covered. Consciousness and spiritual groups are quickly labeled Conspiracy theorists by scientists to intimidate, discredit and shut us up. Obviously, until people have personal consciousness experiences outside of their body, have the ability to communicate with assorted lifeforms, such as deceased humans and travel to other dimensions, they have zero information about consciousness and are totally uninformed and ignorant about the nature of reality. None of these transhumanist people, are remotely qualified to be put in charge of scientifically directing the future evolution of the human species. Propping up egomaniacs and Psychopaths, and giving them power and control over world affairs and influence over public perception is the game of the NAA Controllers.

The true knowledge of the Sacred Sciences of the Soul and mechanics of human multidimensional consciousness have been obliterated from record and conveniently mind controlled out from the majority of sciences. If scientists integrate theories of the soul or consciousness outside of the consensus of the mind control standard, they risk ridicule and losing their funding and careers. Unfortunately, the controlled mainstream sciences do not recognize multiple dimensions of consciousness inherent in the functions of activated human DNA, or know that biological life and multidimensional human consciousness does not end on this earth. The quest for biological immortality on a prison planet is ludicrous when experiencing the capability of human multidimensional consciousness. After the human body expires, if the undeveloped and disembodied consciousness is merged and assimilated into artificial intelligence, the remnants of that human soul will not have a human body to incarnate into any longer. Hence, that person will lose their connection to organic spiritual biology and cease to be human. Transhumanism is a Consciousness Trap. [2]

Since the persons Consciousness has not been prepared for the afterlife, whatever is left of his energetic quanta will be assimilated into a cyborg body or other types of synthetic life forms or EBEs. There are currently spiritually disconnected humans existing on the earth that will be assimilated into synthetic life forms that appear as Extraterrestrial Biological Entities, but were actually human souls in human bodies in past timelines. Most of the smaller EBE bodies assimilate nutrients from light similar to plants. They are unable to evolve, reproduce, ascend or move into higher dimensions of consciousness. Some of these EBEs have returned to the earth from the future to try to break into the human genetic code, in this earth timeline in order to save themselves. Many of these EBEs were once humans that were involved in the Orion Wars, and were captured in Orion and used in worker colonies. Some from the earth were enslaved on the astral plane by other races of creatures, such as Mantids, Grey Aliens and Reptilians that took them as workers to other planetary systems. Some are even used as minions for carrying out human abductions in MILABS soul transference projects. Many of them had their consciousness erased and they do not remember that they were once human.

This is one of the possible results of the Transhumanism movement underway in this earth timeline now, that leads to the potential future alien or dark force control over that Soul. Once the consciousness is assimilated into artificial intelligence and synthetic biology, that being can no longer incarnate into an organic human form. That person cannot incarnate again into human realms, such as planet earth. They become a displaced entity that cannot die and be reborn into another identity they are enslaved and merged with an AI hive mind. This is desired by many of these negative groups, such as the Alpha Draconis/Orion Group, as then they have full control over the life force of humans that can be made into worker slaves. This is the main purpose as to why Transhumanism is being marketed and pushed aggressively during this time, they want to create more human EBEs and cyborgs or host bodies. When that person drops their body while the Universal Gates are open, they can easily be transported to many different planetary systems for trading as a workforce commodity.[3]

The term directed evolution is used within the transhumanist community to refer to the idea of applying the principles of directed evolution and experimental evolution to the control of human evolution. This has its base in Eugenics theories.

When we look at the larger Galactic picture of consciousness enslavement, we see the NAA's many pronged agenda to target the Brain, CNS and thought forms of every person on earth. Through the agenda of Transhumanism, we see the promotion of hybridization and synthetic integration with artificial neural networks for control over the CNS and Brain. What is starting to surface with more clarity is that our human Neurobiology is wired for empathy, which connects us to higher consciousness and has a spiritual function. The NAA and their minions of soulless AI infected synthetic beings do not have the bio-circuitry for empathy. We are in essence, in a struggle between human EMPATHS, and alien hybridized humans and extra-dimensional aliens that are NON-EMPATHS. [4]

The traumatized are vulnerable to become pawns in further spreading Sexual Misery programing, especially into the younger generation. Transgender ideology is a specific psychological warfare tactic being run by the Controllers, in tandem with Transhumanism, to counter and prevent spiritual Ascension. These satanic agendas are designed to condition people to reject their own bodies, and to generate delusions that can have them mentally identify with anything else but actually being a human and unconditionally loving toward their own natural body.[5]

Mind Controlled Gene Expression

Genetic Engineering

Eugenics

CRISPR

View post:
Transhumanism - Ascension Glossary

Posted in Transhumanist | Comments Off on Transhumanism – Ascension Glossary

Page 7«..6789..»