Human race being terminated by ‘scientific suicide’

Standard

2012 The Awakening

via Human race being terminated by ‘scientific suicide’.

Human race being terminated by ‘scientific suicide’
from 2012 The Awakening by AscendingStarseed
While many people might call this article a “fear” piece, I’m bringing it to your attention because even though we may be on the brink of scientific disaster. I believe many of us are here to prevent an extinction type disaster from taking place again. Many of the same souls who didn’t stop the cataclysm during the destruction of Atlantis have come back this lifetime to stop science from repeating the same mistakes from happening again.We can stop it, we just have to make the choice and set our intent.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Monday, May 07, 2012
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035790_scientific_suicide_humans.html#ixzz1uHmB68NT
(NaturalNews) This is, without question, the most important article I’ve ever penned, because it discusses the idea that the human race is being destroyed in the name of science.

Stopping these “scientists” from destroying our world and our civilization must become our top priority if we hope to survive.

The entire Northern hemisphere is now imminently threatened by a massive, “global killer” radiation release from failing Fukushima reactor No. 4. (http://www.naturalnews.com/035789_Fukushima_Cesium-137_Plume-Gate.htm…). Our world is right now just one earthquake away from a radiological apocalypse, and we were put into this position by scientists who promised us that nuclear power would be safe and inexpensive.

Even as we live under the immediate threat of Cesium-137-induced radiological extinction, another group of genetic scientists threatens the future of our world with self-replicating genetic pollution. These scientists work for Monsanto, Dupont and other biotech firms that have compromised the future of life on Earth in order to seek their own selfish profits. Bill Gates and all the others who have promoted GMOs and allowed them to be unleashed into our world are guilty of nothing less than crimes against both the human race and nature itself. They are a threat to the continuation of life on Earth and must be stopped.

In the realm of human biology, our very existence is now being widely threatened by toxic vaccines. Always promoted in the name of “science,” these vaccines actually cause severe neurological damage and widespread infertility, compromising the ability of members of the human race to reproduce.

And in terms of our global food supply, the accelerating collapse of the honey bees is now solidly linked to the widespread use of chemical pesticides manufactured by pharmaceutical companies (http://www.naturalnews.com/034678_honey_bees_colony_collapse_pesticid…). These pesticides, of course, are always promoted in the name of “science!” It’s better living through chemistry, remember?

In fact, if you take an honest look at what threatens our civilization and our planet today, it’s always something done in the name of science!

Death by science

• Toxic pesticides that kill the soils and rivers? “Science!”

• Toxic chemical medications that kill humans and pollute downstream waters? “Scientific!”

• The mass poisoning of the population with a toxic combination of industrial waste products called “fluoride?” It’s all done for “science!”

• Nuclear bombs that have already decimated civilian populations? “Science!”

• Mammograms and other medical imaging devices that actually cause cancer? “Scientific!”

• Chemotherapy poisons, “preventive” mastectomies, cancer radiation treatments? It’s all “scientific” of course.

• The mass mercury poisoning of children through dental amalgams? They call it “science-based dentistry!”

What’s clear from all this is that the human race is being murdered in the name of science.

But underneath that realization is an even more profound one: Much of the so-called “science” is really just fraudulent science that’s twisted, distorted and quacked up by greed-driven corporations.

Real science is the quest for understanding, not the quest for profit

Real science is a good thing, as it is based on the quest for knowledge. But today, there’s not much real science being conducted anymore. Most of what takes place is corporate-driven science for the purpose of gaining power and profits.

In medicine, for example, the search for new drugs is not about helping humanity; it’s about helping quarterly profits. But you already knew that. Only the most naive individuals today still believe Big Pharma cares about human beings.

In the world of GMOs, it’s not about actually “feeding the world” as is ridiculously claimed by its corrupt, criminal pushers; it’s actually about “owning the world” and using food as a weapon against the People of the world. He who controls the food supply eventually controls everything. Monsanto is hell bent on world domination, not world nourishment.

Vaccines, for their part, aren’t about actually preventing disease and enhancing the health of the public. Infectious disease prevention could be easily accomplished through sanitation improvements and low-cost vitamin D supplementation. Vaccines are really about two things: 1) Population control, 2) Repeat business for the drug industry due to all the vaccine damage caused by inoculations. (Vaccines damage the liver, kidneys, brain and intestines, among other organs.)

The “science” practiced today is a science of domination and control. It is almost never carried out for humanitarian purposes to benefit humankind. Even the entire intellectual property “ownership” system of patents and trademarks is set up to grant corporate monopolies over innovation, thereby denying the People access to such innovations. Intellectual property laws have been twisted and exploited by corporate giants to hijack the innovation process and use it to crush competition. All corporations ultimately want a global monopoly over their particular industry sectors.

Universities, which once conducted research to benefit humankind, now use taxpayer money to develop patentable chemicals that are then licensed to drug companies (or pesticide companies) in exchange for royalties that enrich the university.

As a result of such trends, “science” has come to mean corruption, dishonesty, greed and death. “Scientists” — the people who practice such science — are death engineers whose innovations may deliver hyped-up short-term benefits, but they often ultimately lead to long-term death and destruction. Roundup herbicide, for example, kills crop soils and encourages the development of pesticide-resistant “superweeds.” In the terrain of human biology, much the same ramification of death and destruction is happening with the widespread abuse of antibiotics and the alarming rise of MRSA and other “superbugs.”

Such “scientific” innovations were, of course, developed by well-meaning people who didn’t mean to cause widespread crop failures and antibiotic-resistant staph infections, but in doing so they only became experts in paving the road to Hell with good intentions.

Science is killing us. As a race, we are committing suicide by allowing science to dominate our medicine, agriculture and military industries. To the degree that we allow scientists to unleash their dangerous experiments onto the world without legitimate testing — and no, flu shot vaccines are never scientifically tested for long-term safety — we only accelerate the digging of our own graves. If we don’t learn to restrain the blind ambitions of arrogant scientists who are all too easily enticed by the chance to roll the dice in their “let’s play God” games, the blind pursuit of science without wisdom will only lead to our total destruction.

Because next we can count on the rise of the robot drones in the name of science — a new race of Terminator machines (unmanned AI drones) with the capability to mindlessly unleash bombs and bullets on civilian populations. Such drones will be developed in the name of “science,” of course, with all the predictable ego-driven fantasies of their geek-headed inventors who, with all their superior intellect, have still failed to study human history.

Even if the drones don’t get us, nanotechnology may yet spell our demise. Scientists are already running dangerous experiments with nanotechnology, and if just one such experiment results in a self-replicating nanotech “grey goo,” our entire world could be inescapably devoured by self-replicating microscopic machines that make GMOs seem tame by comparison. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_goo)

If we are to survive, we must force science to be bound by the Precautionary Principle

If we are to survive the endless greed, arrogance and ambition of today’s scientists — whose actions more closely resemble little children with flamethrowers than mature, adult individuals — we must force science to abide by the Precautionary Principle.

The Precautionary Principle means that when we experiment with nature, we force ourselves to err on the side of caution, not profits. In practical terms, that means we should never unleash self-replicating genetic programs (GMOs) into the open world and let experimental seeds get blown across the continent by the wind.

We should never build highly radioactive nuclear power facilities that require power to run pumps in order to avoid a nuclear meltdown. Such facilities must be designed to run in a grid-down, self-shutdown format that defaults to an unmanned state of non-criticality.

We should never unleash synthetic chemicals across the world’s crops and soils to kill insects, not knowing the long-term ramifications of such neurotoxins being introduced into the ecosystem.

The Precautionary Principle recognizes that human civilization is fragile, and science-sounding experiments can run amok in ways that simply cannot be anticipated by even the most brilliant and well-intentioned human minds.

Technology without wisdom is suicide

In the name of science, humanity has developed remarkable technologies. But as a species, humankind operates as infants in terms of wisdom and maturity. We are worse than children with flamethrowers — we are children with nukes!

A typical top-level scientist working for a corporation or a government body is ethically under-developed, lacking wisdom and perspective. They may be geniuses in their absurdly narrow realms of technical expertise, but they have no understanding of the importance of restraining the application of scientific pursuits in the real world. Even now, scientists working at the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva are playing God with the universe, attempting to discover what they ridiculously call new “particles” even though such particles are not even particles in the first place. (http://www.naturalnews.com/025486_article_science_WHO.html)

In their quest for what they claim to be scientific knowledge, they are playing a dangerous game with our world, risking the very small but catastrophically fatal chance that their experiment might create a planet-consuming black hole that devours our world. Sound like science fiction? Most conventional scientists dismiss such ideas as pure nonsense. But their colleagues also told us that nuclear power was safe; that GMOs are safe; that pesticides are safe; that fluoride is safe; that vaccines are safe; and on and on. If there’s one thing we can scientifically establish as truth in our world today, it’s that scientists vastly and naively overestimate the safety of their own experiments, often in ways that cause widespread harm, death or destruction to innocent people around them.

Scientists are a danger to our world, in other words. And they need to be immediately restrained before they utterly destroy the very conditions on our planet that make human life possible.

History has taught us that scientists have very little ability to anticipate the long-term effects of their present-day actions. The nature of the universe is more complex than even the most brilliant scientist can imagine, it turns out, and when they start to play God with the natural world, unexpected things can and do occur. Murphy was an optimist, as the saying goes. Not only will things go wrong if they can go wrong; they will go wrong in catastrophic ways that simply cannot be anticipated.

The sixth mass extinction on our planet may be caused by science itself

There have been five mass extinction events on our planet, the most recent being the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous%E2%80%93Paleogene_extinction_…).

The sixth such event may be caused by science itself, either with a global radiological release, a runaway genetic pollution event, a nanotechnology disaster, an AI rise to power, or something far more sinister that we can’t even anticipate. We already stand on the verge of being inundated with radiation from Fukushima — a precarious situation upon which “the fate of the world” now rests. What other great threats to our survival have been committed in the name of science?

Until the Wild West, “anything goes” approach to science as practiced today is held in check by a sense of self preservation, the human race will remain at grave risk of becoming an inadvertent casualty of well-intentioned science gone terribly wrong.

Let us take steps now to halt the life-threatening science that has put us all at risk and pull ourselves back from the brink of scientific suicide.

The top ten “scientific” projects threatening the survival of the human race right now

#1) Nuclear power (Fukushima in particular)
#2) GMOs (self-replicating genetic pollution)
#3) Nanotechnology (self-replicating microscopic machines)
#4) Bioweapons (self-replicating microscopic weapons)
#5) Atmospheric experiments (HAARP and high-altitude spraying)
#6) Artificial Intelligence (AI, when coupled with killer drone hardware)
#7) Particle accelerator physics experiments (Large Hadron Collider)
#8) Pollinator disruption chemicals (synthetic pesticides that destroy honey bee colonies)
#9) Nuclear weapons
#10) Weaponized vaccines (live cross-species viral material being injected into human targets)

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035790_scientific_suicide_humans.html#ixzz1uHkAGynB

612 total views, no views today

Flying saucer that can plant explosives or bugs set for frontline

Standard
The Fenstar flying saucer

The Fenstar flying saucer is considered one of the front runners to win the RJ Mitchell prize
Photo: OLI SCARFF

The UFO-like object is among a range of gadgets that have been
developed by schools, universities and small companies as part of a
Ministry of Defence competition to develop everyday technology to help
troops fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Eleven teams enlisted
from the “anorak brigade” have made it to the final week of competition
to demonstrate their machines at the Army’s purpose-built urban warfare
town in Copehill Down, Salisbury Plain.

The Fenstar flying saucer
is considered one of the front runners to win the RJ Mitchell prize –
named after the Spitfire’s inventor – next Tuesday.

Without any
external blades and using a two stroke petrol engine, the unmanned
aerial vehicle can enter a building either through a window or door and
send back high-quality images on its video camera feed.

With
efforts being made to make an electric engine that generates little
noise, the Fenstar’s inventors, hope it could be quiet enough to snoop
into rooms and plant listening devices without being seen or heard.
Similarly it could also plant explosive devices to kill the enemy.

Controlled
using a Playstation joystick the 20kg (44lbs) machine is designed to be
easily handled by soldiers and is equipped with an infra-red camera,
laser scanners and has a top speed of 40mph.

It can operate autonomously after being given “way points” on its GPS system and can hover or land at will.

The
Fenstar was built by Team MIRA, that includes students from Warwick
University and the Royal Grammar School Guildford, who have already
developed a Frisbee like device that weighs just a few ounces.

The
public may soon be confronted by flying saucers over cathedral spires
as surveyors consider using the device to spots for cracks or erosion
on high or inaccessible buildings.

Similarly it could drop
buoyancy aides to struggling swimmers or mobile phones to stranded
climbers. Discussions are already underway with geologists to see if it
could be used to hover over steep rock faces to examine strata.

Other
technology devices at the competition include mini-buggies that are
equipped with cameras and can move at 40mph or sit at night near a
cross-roads spying on terrorists planting bombs.

Camera
technology is also being deployed onto model aircraft or helicopters
that can tell the difference between children and adults or a gunman
and a cameraman.

The Grand Challenge idea was developed by the
former procurement minister Lord Drayson who wanted to get “box-room
inventors” to see if high street technology could be used on the
battlefield.

The MoD invested £4.5 million in the project last
year and the return on the money had been “enormous”, said Prof Phil
Sutton, the MoD’s head of science and technology strategy.

“Britain
has a strong and rich history of inventors and innovators and they do
work extremely well under the pressure of a challenge,” he said. “We
now need to put these ideas to good use.”

Major Phil Nathan, an
infantry officer who has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, said:
“Aircraft that can look over walls or into compounds in Afghanistan
will prove a real asset to the troops. Your situational awareness is
drastically reduced in Afghanistan so anything that can get above it or
see around corners could be a major life saver.”

512 total views, no views today

Exoskeleton for grannies

Standard

Exoskeleton for grannies

Finding ways to assist and care for the growing elderly population in many developed countries is a growing problem. One challenge is to work out how to improve the strength and utility of ageing limbs.

Yoshiyuki Sankai at the University of Tsukuba near Tokyo, has developed an exoskeleton for a single arm that can do just that.

The device consists of a tabard worn over the shoulders with a motorised exoskeleton for one arm attached. The exoskeleton senses the angle, torque and nerve impulses in the arm and then assists the user to move his or her shoulder and elbow joints accordingly.

Read the full arm exoskeleton patent application.

Justin Mullins, New Scientist consultant

498 total views, no views today

Uncle Sam Wants Your Brain

Standard

Uncle Sam Wants Your Brain

By Brandon Keim EmailAugust 13, 2008 | 3:16:08 PMCategories: Brain, Cognition, Human 2.0, Military

Soldiers
Drugs that make soldiers want to fight. Robots linked directly to their controllers’ brains. Lie-detecting scans administered to terrorist suspects as they cross U.S. borders.

These are just a few of the military uses imagined for cognitive science — and if it’s not yet certain whether the technologies will work, the military is certainly taking them very seriously.

“It’s way too early to know which — if any — of these technologies is going to be practical,” said Jonathan Moreno, a Center for American Progress bioethicist and author of Mind Wars: Brain Research and National Defense. “But it’s important for us to get ahead of the curve. Soldiers are always on the cutting edge of new technologies.”

Moreno is part of a National Research Council committee convened by the Department of Defense to evaluate the military potential of brain science. Their report, “Emerging Cognitive Neuroscience and Related Technologies,” was released today. It charts a range of cognitive technologies that are potentially powerful — and, perhaps, powerfully troubling.

Here are the report’s main areas of focus:

  • Mind reading. The development of psychological models and neurological imaging has made it possible to see what people are thinking and whether they’re lying. The science is, however, still in its infancy: Challenges remain in accounting for variations between individual brains, and the tendency of our brains to change over time.One important application is lie detection — though one hopes that the lesson of traditional lie detectors, predicated on the now-disproven idea that the physiological basis of lying can be separated from processes such as anxiety, has been learned.

    Mind readers could be used to interrogate captured enemies, as well as “terrorist suspects” passing through customs. But does this mean, for example, that travelers placed on the bloated, mistake-laden watchlist would have their minds scanned, just as their computers will be?

    The report notes that “In situations where it is important to win the hearts and minds of the local populace, it would be useful to know if they understand the information being given them.”

  • Cognitive enhancement. Arguably the most developed area of cognitive neuroscience, with drugs already allowing soldiers to stay awake and alert for days at a time, and brain-altering drugs in widespread use among civilians diagnosed with mental and behavioral problems.Improved drug delivery systems and improved neurological understanding could make today’s drugs seem rudimentary, giving soldiers a superhuman strength and awareness — but if a drug can be designed to increase an ability, a drug can also be designed to destroy it.

    “It’s also important to develop antidotes and protective agents against various classes of drugs,” says the report. This echoes the motivation of much federal biodefense research, in which designing defenses against potential bioterror agents requires those agents to be made — and that raises the possibility of our own weapons being turned against us, as with the post-9/11 anthrax attacks, which used a military developed strain.

  • Mind control. Largely pharmaceutical, for the moment, and a natural outgrowth of cognitive enhancement approaches and mind-reading insight: If we can alter the brain, why not control it?One potential use involves making soldiers want to fight. Conversely, “How can we disrupt the enemy’s motivation to fight? […] How can we make people trust us more? What if we could help the brain to remove fear or pain? Is there a way to make the enemy obey our commands?”
  • Brain-Machine Interfaces. The report focuses on direct brain-to-machine systems (rather than, for example, systems that are controlled by visual movements, which are already in limited use by paraplegics.) Among these are robotic prostheses that replace or extend body parts; cognitive and sensory prostheses, which make it possible to think and to perceive in entirely new ways; and robotic or software assistants, which would do the same thing, but from a distance.Many questions surrounding the safety of current brain-machine interfaces: The union of metal and flesh only lasts so long before things break down. But assuming those can be overcome, questions of plasticity arise: What happens when a soldier leaves the service? How might their brains be reshaped by their experience?

Like Moreno said, it’s too early to say what will work. The report documents in great detail the practical obstacles to these aims — not least the failure of reductionist neuroscientific models, in which a few firing neurons can be easily mapped to a psychological state, and brains can be analyzed in one-map-fits-all fashion.

But given the rapid progress of cognitive science, it’s foolish to assume that obstacles won’t be overcome. Hugh Gusterson, a George Mason University anthropologist and critic of the military’s sponsorship of social science research, says their attempt to crack the cultural code is unlikely to work — “but my sense with neuroscience,” he said, “is a far more realistic ambition.”

Gusterson is deeply pessimistic about military neuroscience, which will not be limited to the United States.

“I think most reasonable people, if they imagine a world in which all sides have figured out how to control brains, they’d rather not go there,” he said. “Most rational human beings would believe that if we could have a world where nobody does military neuroscience, we’ll all be better off. But for some people in the Pentagon, it’s too delicious to ignore.”

Emerging Cognitive Neuroscience and Related Technologies [National Academies Press]

Image: University of Western Florida

Note: The NRC committee is formally known as the Committee on Military and Intelligence Methodology for Emergent Neurophysiological and Cognitive/Neural Science Research in the Next Two Decades. In the future, cognitive technologies will apparently obviate the need for snappy, easily-acronymed titles.

WiSci 2.0: Brandon Keim’s Twitter and Del.icio.us feeds; Wired Science on Facebook.

482 total views, 1 views today