Biodiversity: The Genetic Takeover Of All Living Things
The World Economic Forum’s self-declared “Great Reset” has two aspects: first, is the radical economic transformation promoted as Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy; second is the radical transformation of all living things, including humans, aka Transhumanism. The WEF’s own website speaks plainly about both.
This has led me to describe this phenomenon like this: “Technocracy is to the structure of society as Transhumanism is to those who live in that society.”
Given this backdrop, the frontal assault to implement the Great Reset started on January 30, 2020 with the World Health Organization’s declaration of pandemic. Fear and propaganda drove people to obey insane and destructive policies implemented around the world, which some scholars are calling a “mass formation psychosis”.
Of course, you know most of this intuitively because you have been living it for over 2 years.
In these pages, you have heard about the UN’s Agenda 21, 2030 Agenda, Biodiversity. Sustainable Development, etc. You have fought against the policies that were intended to destroy you, and those battles are still raging.
Now let me tell you what we all missed that will connect a plethora of dots on why we are where we are today.
Two eye witnesses and participants at the original Agenda 21 conference in 1992 also participated in the Biodiversity Convention that ran in parallel. They wrote in their 1994 book, The Earth Brokers,
“Neither Brundtland, nor the secretariat, nor the governments drafted plan to examine the pitfalls of free trade and industrial development. Instead, they wrote up a convention on how to ‘develop’ the use of biodiversity through patents and biotechnology.” (p. 3)
Patents and biotechnology? That’s not your grandmother’s biodiversity. They continued,
“The convention implicitly equates the diversity of life – animals and plants – to the diversity of genetic codes, for which read genetic resources. By doing so, diversity becomes something that modern science can manipulate. Finally, the convention promotes biotechnology as being ‘essential for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.” (p. 42)
And they shockingly concluded,
“The main stake raised by the Biodiversity Convention is the issue of ownership and control over biological diversity… the major concern was protecting the pharmaceutical and emerging biotechnology industries.” (p. 43)
Note carefully that ownership and control over genes was not a side issue or a minor stake: It was the MAIN STAKE! Note also that the main actors were the pharmaceutical and emerging biotechnology industries.
This presents a totally different definition of biodiversity that was indiscernible until the Great Panic of 2020 hit. Now it screams to us from the highest mountaintop.
Looking backward now, we don’t have to wonder why Monsanto created a global monopoly on genetically modified seed where they claimed ownership over everything they touched, enforcing royalty payments for every seed germinated, everywhere.
We don’t have to wonder why insects are being genetically modified, leading skeptical scientists to write papers like, Genetically modified insects could disrupt international food trade.
We don’t have to wonder why animals are being genetically modified, like transgenic cattle, swine and goats.
Further, why should we wonder that the pharmaceutical industry is trying to inject all humans in the world with an experimental drug containing synthetic, gene edited mRNA that templates spike proteins to be released into our bodies? (India has recently released a comparable DNA vaccine).
This has happened right under our noses while everyone’s attention was focused on other issues. What we thought were the key issues of Agenda 21, the 2030 Agenda, Biodiversity Convention, etc., were indeed real issues, but they were not the main issue.
Rather, the main issue was and is the takeover of all genetic material on earth.
With that settled, it is now understandable why the whole Transhuman movement has jumped all over the GMO human meme. Historically, Transhumanism was just a “lost-in-space” metaphysical philosophy that sought to take control over man’s evolution, escape death and achieve immortality. Today, its Holy Grail has appeared: hacking the human genome to create Humans 2.0.
Alas, let’s go back to the World Economic Forum that sees itself as the great and only savior of the world.
Read More : Biodiversity
Canadian Government’s Think-Tank Explores Transhuman Society
The Government of Canada’s think-tank, Policy Horizons Canada, published a report titled Exploring Biodigital Convergence looking at transhumanism.
Biodigital convergence can be defined as the intersection and synthesis of biological systems with digital technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), biometrics and genetic engineering. In the human realm, this field is called transhumanism.
The report examines the implications of the assimilation of digital technologies with biological entities that, in essence, would fundamentally re-imagine life on an individual, environmental, and societal level. More concisely, the reconfiguration — if realized — would radically redefine what it means to be human.
Transhumanism is no longer a concept confined to a generation of cheesy Hollywood B-movies — the technology exists right here, right now.
Policy Horizons Canada is a federal government organization conducting policy research into potential future scenarios for Canadian society and its economic and industrial future. Its mandate is to help the Canadian government create future-oriented policies and frameworks that anticipate emerging challenges in near and distant time frames.
Kristel Van der Elst, the current director general of Policy Horizons Canada and former head of strategic foresight at the World Economic Forum, provides an overview in the report.
“In the coming years, biodigital technologies could be woven into our lives in the way that digital technologies are now. Biological and digital systems are converging, and could change the way we work, live, and even evolve as a species. More than a technological change, this biodigital convergence may transform the way we understand ourselves and cause us to redefine what we consider human or natural,” Van der Elst said in the report’s foreword.
“Guided by its mandate, Policy Horizons Canada intends to start an informed and meaningful dialogue about plausible futures for biodigital convergence and the policy questions that may arise. In this initial paper, we define and explore biodigital convergence — why it is important to explore now, its characteristics, what new capabilities could arise from it, and some initial policy implications. We want to engage with a broad spectrum of partners and stakeholders on what our biodigital future might look like, how this convergence might affect sectors and industries, and how our relationships with technology, nature, and even life itself could evolve,” she said.
The report’s summary describes the evolution of digital technologies as thus far having had “powerful effects” on society, also that biodigital convergence might present people with challenges that will “in ways … be profoundly disruptive to our assumptions about society, the economy, and our bodies.”
In summary, the fusion of nature and technology at this level will profoundly alter systems in a variety of unprecedented ways, the report said they will:
change human beings — our bodies, minds, and behaviours;
change or create other organisms;
sense, store, process, and transmit information;
manage biological innovation; and
structure and manage production and supply chains.
Outlining the convergence of human and machine, the report explicitly defines Policy Horizons Canada’s vision.
“Digital technology can be embedded in organisms, and biological components can exist as parts of digital technologies. The physical meshing, manipulating, and merging of the biological and digital are creating new hybrid forms of life and technology, each functioning in the tangible world, often with heightened capabilities,” the report said.
The report outlines “Three ways biodigital convergence is emerging,” namely:
Full physical integration of biological and digital entities;
Co-evolution of biological and digital technologies; and;
Conceptual convergence of biological and digital systems.
The document also touches on the genetic modification of biological systems and CRISPR gene-editing technology.
Read More : Canadian Government’s Think-Tank Explores Transhuman Society
Musk, Grimes, Scientism And The Slippery Slope To Cyborg Theocracy
Techno-optimists like to say humans are already cyborgs awaiting their next upgrade. Yesterday it was smartphones, today it’s virtual reality goggles, and tomorrow—the brain chip. With each new device, our evolution toward human-machine symbiosis accelerates. That’s obvious when you ask someone for directions and they pull out their phone.
Techno-pessimists largely agree. Tech companies are turning us into cybernetic organisms. The difference is, we’re not stoked about it. Even if “progress” really is “inevitable,” there’s no sense in getting all giddy about nuclear warheads or trans children or smartphone dependency. In light of their vices and virtues, some cultures are better than others.
It’s true that humans are tool-users, by nature, but you have to choose your tools wisely. All technologies fall on a spectrum, albeit with discrete punctuation—from cave painting to the printing press to electrodes that write memes directly onto your wiggling brain cells. Every person has to draw their own lines.
Grimes: A Mutated Generation
Of all the cyber-saints in media—from Bill Gates to Lady Gaga—few are as honest as the techno-pagan pop starlet, Grimes. A bit of a dingbat, sure, but candid nonetheless. You can see why Elon Musk sired two children with her (a son named X Æ A-12, and their daughter, Exa Dark Sideræl, born via a surrogate mother
Last week Grimes explained
to Lex Fridman:
We are becoming cyborgs, like, our brains are fundamentally changed—everyone who grew up with electronics, we are fundamentally different from previous Homo sapiens. I call us “Homo techno.” I think we’ve evolved into Homo techno which is like, essentially a new species.
I think the computers are what make us Homo techno. I think it’s a brain augmentation.
Right on cue, the Twitter sperg-borg picked her theory apart. Darwinian evolution is genetic evolution. Yes, natural selection may act on fit brains and bodies, but it only matters—in evolutionary terms—because the genes get passed on. So you can’t change someone’s species by changing their brain, or their legs, or any outward part of their body.
As usual, the spergs miss the point. But before I defend Grimes, let’s hear a little more about her cyborg sorcery:
Now is the moment to reprogram the human computer. It’s like, if you go blind, your visual cortex will get taken over with other functions.
Read More: Musk, Grimes, Scientism And The Slippery Slope To Cyborg Theocracy
06-12-2022, 05:11 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-12-2022, 05:11 PM by awakened53.)
WEF Says Smartphone Tech Will Be Incorporated Into Your Body – exactly as I have predicted for decades
Speaking in Davos at the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting, Nokia CEO and WEF agenda contributor
Pekka Lundmark said that smartphone tech will be incorporated into human bodies by 2030.
When asked about it
, Lundmark said, “First of all, it will definitely happen. I was talking about 6G earlier, which [will happen] around 2030. I would say that by then, definitely, the smartphone as we know it today will not be the most common interface.”
“Many of these things will be built directly into our bodies.”
Quote:World Economic Forum… Humans to be integrated with smartphone technology by 2030 using 6G… Nokia CEO confirms conspiracy theory is real pic.twitter.com/Zuy0CHtXju
— Pelham (@Resist_05) June 8, 2022
Read more: WEF Says Smartphone Tech Will Be Incorporated Into Your Body – exactly as I have predicted for decades
07-17-2022, 07:09 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-17-2022, 07:11 AM by Steve.)
Whitney Webb Interview – The Google AI sentience psyop
Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed
Subscribe: Email | RSS
Joining me today is Whitney Webb, here to discuss her recent research into a very intriguing (and highly suspicious) story regarding a Google engineer and his claims about a sentient artificial Intelligence — and the subsequent denial by Google itself. Today we will review this claim and its surrounding information, as well as the possibility that this is a ruse designed to create the illusion of sentience being hidden from the people, and what that illusion of AI-driven decision-making might mean for the future of governance.
Humanity 2.0: ‘The Fusion Of Our Physical, Digital, And Biological Identities’
Artificial intelligence is pulling new vaccines
out of the Platonic realm. Automated labs are on standby
, prepared to crank out alien strands of mRNA and pack them into toxic nanoparticles. A billion empty syringes are waiting on shelves.
This is not science fiction. These jabs will be on the market before you can say “boostah.”
Google. Moderna. Microsoft. They’re all racing to the edge
. This is corporate transhumanism in all its avaricious glory, riding waves of propaganda and channeled by the biosecurity state.
These people uphold a new mythos whose axis mundi
is the Machine. In their world, digital minds are “dreaming up
” novel genetic configurations. Biological systems are treated as “living software
.” With each technical advance, their myths bleed into our reality.
A 2019 white paper from Policy Horizons Canada Horizons describes this shift as a “biodigital convergence
,” characterized by:
1 – Full physical integration
of biological and digital entities
2 – Coevolution
of biological and digital entities
3 – Conceptual convergence
of biological and digital systems
Our intelligentsia—the elites “educated beyond their level of intelligence”—are undergoing a sort of religious conversion. Their world has been illuminated by gene sequencing and neural networks.
Their machines have convinced them that living things are just clunky machines. Our immune systems require software updates. Our flawed genomes need debugging. In order to get there, our brains must be augmented.
“Reality explored by AI, or with the assistance of AI, may prove to be something other than what humans had imagined,” wrote ex-Google chief Eric Schmidt in his 2021 book The Age of AI.
“Across the biological, chemical, and physical sciences, a hybrid partnership is emerging in which AI is enabling new discoveries.”
For Schmidt and his coauthors, this vantage point has a mystical quality:
The prognostications of the Gnostic philosophers, of an inner reality beyond ordinary experience, may prove newly significant. … Sometimes, the result will be the revelation of properties of the world that were beyond our conception—until we cooperated with machines.
Read More: Humanity 2.0: ‘The Fusion Of Our Physical, Digital, And Biological Identities’
Cult-owned Elon Musk: Your brain will get its own USB-C Port. What a blatant fraud this man is and still parts of the alternative media can’t see the obvious
Your brain, with a USB-C port in it. That’s Elon Musk’s vision for Brain Machine Interfaces (BMI). In a controversial July 2019 white paper
he claimed that his company Neuralink
had taken a huge step towards building a “scalable high-bandwidth BMI system” that would let the human brain “stream full broadband electrophysiology data” to a network, using a combination of ultra-fine polymer probes, a neurosurgical robot that sews them into the brain, and custom high-density electronics.
A “single USB-C cable provides full-bandwidth data streaming from the device” the paper noted: the device having been stitched, in theory, to your cerebral cortex. Neuroscientists were varying shades of intrigued, appalled and dismissive: the custom hardware would only pick up noise, they suggested: interpretation of brain waves simply wasn’t that advanced; the ethical issues were pronounced; the body would reject this level of intervention; where was the peer review of the paper?
A year later, Musk has promised a Neuralink update.
This was cryptically announced by Musk in July 2020, with the Tweets
: “If you can’t beat em, join em Neuralink mission statement” and “Progress update August 28”. Ten days ahead of the reveal, we decided to take stock of Neuralink’s work’s and the ongoing discussion around the potential of BMI; speaking to a range of specialists in the sector about where the work was going and how realistic Musk’s vision was.
Neuralink began as a way to advance the technology of BMI: described by one organisation, the Mayo Clinic, as a technology that “acquires brain signals, analyses them and translates them into commands that are relayed to output devices that carry out desired actions”. (Many observers suspect that the pending update will have to do with the “analyse them” part of that statement, and Musk’s “if you can’t beat ’em” statement refer to his well-documented concerns about the power of AI.)
These “desired actions” could be how to move a wheelchair without the use of your arms or how to control bionic limbs: “It is plausible to imagine that a patient with spinal cord injury could dexterously control a digital mouse and keyboard” wrote Musk in the 2019 paper. “When combined with rapidly improving spinal stimulation techniques, in the future this approach could conceivably restore motor function. High-bandwidth neural interfaces should enable a variety of novel therapeutic possibilities”.
Read More: Transhuman Elon Musk: Your Brain Will Get Its Own USB-C Port