Transhumanist

THE TRANSHUMANISM SCRAPBOOK: GENETICALLY EDITED HUMANS IN TWO YEARS?

This is another case where so many of you shared versions of this story, it would be impossible to thank you all by name(or rather, by initials, as is our custom here when we have the chance). But this story is so significant not only for the growing "transhumanist" agenda in popular culture, and for recent geopolitical developments, that to ignore it might be akin to a "sin of omission," for the idea is now circulating around the internet that genetically modified humans are on their way, perhaps in as little as two years:

The First Genetically Modified Human Could Exist Within 2 Years

I want to draw your attention to these parts of the article, outlining the new CRISPR genetic engineering technique, and its implications for the possibility of "designer babies," even though, at the moment, the technique is being touted in terms of preventative "genetic medicine":

The biotech firm Editas Medicine says that humans who have had their DNA genetically modified could exist within the next 2 years. The company announced that it will soon start the first trials of what it calls a groundbreaking new technique.

U.S.-based Editas is striving to become the first lab in the world to edit the DNA of patients suffering from leber congenital amaurosis (LCA), a genetic condition that causes severe vision loss at birth. Some LCA patients also experience central nervous system conditions, such as epilepsy, developmental delays and motor skill impairment.

LCA is said to be caused by defects in a gene responsible for the creation of a protein that is vital to vision. Editas Medicine scientists believe they can fix the mutated DNA using gene-editing technology known as CRISPRs.

CRISPRs, which stands for “clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats,” allows scientists to edit genes “with precision, efficiency and flexibility,” Gizmodoexplained in a May 5, 2015 article. Researchers have reportedly been able to create monkeys with targeted mutations and prevent HIV infection in human cells using this piece of biotechnology.

In early May, Chinese scientists said they’d successfully applied CRISPRs to nonviable human embryos, suggesting that the technology could someday be used to treat any genetic disease. It might even be used to create “designer babies” in the future, though that day is a long ways off.

As always, the ethical and moral problems posed by such technologies come to the forefront: in the "brave new world" of designer babies, for example, will one be allowed to "take the chance" and have babies that might be born with such birth defects, or other birth defects, "the old fashioned way," or will the new technologies compel new types of regulations of human procreation itself? Will one have to undergo genetic testing and obtain a "permit to copulate" and reproduce? And will one be required to allow genetic engineering of one's offspring if, for example, genetic testing indicate the possibility or probability of some defect? Will it be, in other words, an excuse to practice a soft form of eugenics?  More importantly, will such techniques be the camel's nose in the tent, to press for patenting of such offspring, or even the idea of an annuity to be paid to ma corporation for the use of its technologies in having such "designer babies"? Given the track record of corporate greed and mercantilisti policies in the GMO business "community," the possibility does exist, and therefore demands vigilance to prevent yet another massive expansion of corporate power at the expense of individual human freedom and rights.

All of these possibilities are, as I've argued before, in the offing.

But there's another possibility that occurred to me when I read the many articles on this story that people were sending to me, a possibility reinforced by the timing of this story so close to the recent attacks in Paris, and that possibility might be voiced in the form of a question: why this story, now? The high octane speculative answer came almost immediately: how better to fight a "war on terror" against the existential threat of jihadism, not simply with drones, or, as is probably coming, robots, but also with the "super-soldier," the soldier enhanced by a variety of technologies including nanotechnology, exoskeletal suits magnifying physical power and pwerformance, genetic alterations to allow less, or little sleep, food, self-healing wounds, and so on? Such technologies, from a certain point of view, would arguably be an affront to Muslim theological tenets and hence "off limits," just as we have seen more fundamentalist pronouncements from that culture against the idea of a permanent human presence on other celestial bodies such as Mars. In that case, such technologies would give the non-Muslim world a huge technological and military advantage, and expose the Islamic investments in acquisition of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons as a huge waste of money. In the light of this high octane speculative context, it is interesting indeed to contemplate the fact that both DARPA in the West, and Russia, have made the acquisition of sophisticated robotic technology - with all its attendant nano- and genetic technology offshoots - high priority projects for their militaries, and I cannot help but think that this prioritization are in large part due to a long term "assessment of the situation" regarding the "War on Terror."

See you on the flip side...

28 thoughts on “THE TRANSHUMANISM SCRAPBOOK: GENETICALLY EDITED HUMANS IN TWO YEARS?”

  1. So it seems likely, dna is rife with messages throughout and everywhere and the published knowledge we’ve accessed so far is a drop in quite a big bucket. Not to mention dna’s ability to record, adjust, change, mold and remold. The term evolution has been so abused and exploited for abuse, it seems much better terms are warranted. Either way, my WASG is that life expressed through dna (and vice versa) is capable of change infinitely faster than we’ve been led to believe by the Wedgewood/Gates/Ford/Rockefeller foundations (aka Mr Global).

    That kinda makes me wanna go think deep thoughts. And nice ones too.

    By the way Yogi Greg. That’s a tough vision. Sure hope it’s a direction we all become less involved in soon and forever. Kinda reminds me of the story about dna tracked in every dog in Israel and UK. So that now any errant dog poo is sampled and traced back to its dog of origin and their owner for fines. That’s a whole lot of effort to achieve a sincerely poopy outlook in life.

    Thank you all. Goodnight.

  2. DE,
    ya can’t prove a negative. And if I’m God, I fairly confident – well actually I’m confident. That’s all. I’m not going to take much to proofs nor tests about me nor my existence. And really what use would anyone have for a God who would put up with that?

    You and RB have touched on some profound stuff there. Ruppert Sheldrake has touched on some of that extensively. A few others in electric universe areas (specifically thunderbolts.info) get into it as well. My personal guess. Whatever deity I can factor into any reality I’m willing to cop to, is not just in a few things, places, beings, whatever. That deity is even more than in everything. That deity is in fact everything. And measurable, understandable, clarifying, useful,…. pretty much everything good. After all the idea of weak or bad deities is kind of embarrassing to any halfway sane system of logic.

    So yeh, how does current science measure life? How does current science decide when life is no more? Isn’t it an electrical signal? EEG? EKG?

    1. Along these lines (and morphic fields and resonances), darwinian folk for years have described dna as mostly useless with only a few sections accounted for and believed to be pertinent. Like their god throws out a bunch of junk and lets it randomly occasionally purely by luck turn into something useful.

      Ever considered the primordial goo theory (or something like that)?
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_soup

      The idea being that a few chemicals get zapped at just the right time and change into a life form (aka mostly defined by self replicating). Interesting method of playing dice with the universe.

      Ever considered cymatics?
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cymatics

      Ever considered combining ideas to make cymatically organized primordial soup? And that electricity is in everything? In fact is everything? In fact that everything is energy with gravity and matter as being side effects at most?

      1. John Taylor Gatto has a bit to say about Darwin and Galton, two of the most powerful and recently open eugenicists of this millennia. Darwin wrote his theory to please his older cousin. They wanted a scientific basis for biology backing their social darwinian theories of mankind. They felt (and wrote extensively with and to each other) about humans and their 57 races with Germans and English at the top. The G and E were improving, evolving, strengthening humanity while the other 55 races were here to serve the top 2 races. Except for those few bottom races who were so backward as to be devolving and holding back the rest of humanity. Hence the justification in eliminating all of those bottom races.

        I always get a kick out of the fact that nobody ever guesses accurately who the bottom race on their list was. The race that they needed to completely exterminate immediately. Most guess African and Asian races. No one ever gets the Irish at first guess.

        Does this give any clues as to the basis of thought, theory and research such minds work with and in and around? And where their thoughts necessarily take them and anyone else willing to go along? Even if going along just to argue with the driver for awhile? Think the Gates Fdtn can trace any lineage back to Wedgewood wealth?

    1. Robert Barricklow

      Love it as well zdb.

      A lot better than today’s/
      I’m not me anymore. I’m a hardware store.
      -Inspector Gadget, 1999

  3. A few years ago, or decades, I watched two young ladies, early twenties, discuss hypotheticals with their parents. At least i thought they were hypotheticals. Their main thrust was to feel out what their parents would think, say and do if the two young ladies were to live with, premaritally, their boyfriends. I was young. Looking back, these were not hypotheticals. They were not discussing their futures. They were discussing their pasts. Probably pasts that were 2 to 4 years past.

    While discussions like those brought out by Dr Farrell are most likely past due, it still feels like the type of folk who operate the type of systems we seem so fortunate to live in, and who disclose what, when and how they disclose to us, are, well, not likely to bring us in on their decisions before the fact. They may or may not foreshadow or warn, but they are going to decide what they will. Then, they’ll do what they will. After all, they’re the deciders right?

    Sometimes it feels like the A. Crowley’s of the world (let’s lump all the devil worship sorts altogether here) do their crazy angry intimidation dances more or less to salve a conscience so guilty as to be dysfunctional. After all, to the degree I’m large and in charge, I can afford to be nice, considerate and careful with the least among us. The weaker I am, the meaner I have to be to get my goals.

    These kinds of thoughts (more aptly called feelings since they’re more intuited than sussed out well) get me thinking about impertinence and counterproductive nature of laws. Does anyone feel safer legislating against ignorance? Do any of us feel safer when we walk through a public doorway posted with signs declaring firearms are illegal inside?

    1. In that light, laws are more like warnings to the sane: “hey you sane guy. yeh, the speed limit of 30mph in this area is what a sane guy does. see that guy doing 90mph coming around that bend? you might wanna get off this road for a little bit. there might be more like him soon. not for very long mind you, but soon if they do. and by the way, might wanna get out that guys way too.”

      Laws are really natures way of saying: “yes sir. this law about this act was written because humans really are capable of being this stupid. and no human is beyond that kind of stupidity. we’re all potentially that stupid. so keep some humility and care. it can happen here and to us. there but for the grace of deity, go all of us.”

      1. I like the insight, I look at most rules and laws as being more like suggestions. Provided doing so doesn’t hurt anyone else, I tend not to follow very many. Although occasionally I like to envision myself in the oligarchical shoes. Some people are incredibly ignorant, some people are apathetic toward their fellow man, and others are just plain evil. Laws are necessary. I understand why they keep free energy technology hidden, but at the same time steps need to be taken so that humanity can mature to the point where that tech can be released safely. I’m afraid they’ve decided that task is simply too daunting for them. Much easier and safer from their point of view to bring about whatever changes they deem necessary biologically and involuntarily. Ultimately their plans will fail unless they learn the error of their ways. The only thing that can save us now is truth, for every person to uphold individual responsibility and compassion. The PTB need to come clean, that’s the only way I’ll forgive them.

  4. Robert Barricklow

    The blurring of boundary between “person” and “product” will arguably be the defining feature of these “enhancement” technologies.
    A new kind of inequality, even more intractable than the socioeconomic disparities of today.

  5. Robert Barricklow

    People will be able to sculpt their own selfhood over time, reshaping their bodies, augmenting their cognition, reconfiguring their character & personality. Contemporary society is dangerously unprepared for the coming changes accelerating at us at ever increasing speeds. This society is not like the Jetsons, where technology evolves will the humans remain relatively the same; no – these technologies will tend to exacerbate the overall fragmentation of humankind.
    Thomas Jefferson is one of my all time favorites and he has the quote just perfect for what’s happening/The mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the Grace of God. -1826
    [Luckily, he wasn’t born in the neoliberal transhumanist future.]

      1. Robert Barricklow

        Yes Daniel; they, the elites, the NWOs, the Breakaways, and all their ilk, are all riding their prized four horses of the apocalypse.

  6. Robert Barricklow

    The future enters into us in order to transform itself in us long before it happens.

    If ever there be a forbidden fruit to avoid; this is it.
    Once down this road, humanity will be graced; if the merest act of kindness, survives to remains the ultimate enhancement.

    1. Robert Barricklow

      Of course, there should be rigorous public oversight when it comes to this event horizon: the commercializing/enhancing homo sapiens.
      Whens the “enhancements” come, the saying of: be careful what you wish for – will be manifested within these potent transhumanist tools, that could end up turning you into something you really don’t want to be.

      If you think your iPhone is a transformative device, just wait til they turn-on your brain machine interface.

    2. Robert Barricklow

      Oh, and sex. Forget about it. It will be simply wild!
      But on the other side of the coin, with human reproduction wholly separated from sexual behavior and gender rules…. ?
      Viva la difference… qui n’exists plus.

      1. I doubt there will ever be an ‘objective’ proof or disproof of the existence of God. But there IS proof that WE are attempting to play God. So…the CRISPR technique will probably create ‘CRISPy cRitters’ as our legacy for the future?
        More seriously, has anyone heard of the genetic scientist, Bruce Lipton, and his work recorded in a two hour dvd titled , “The New Biology- the Genes Illusion”? (through ‘truthseekingdvds.com’ out of Australia). I have only watched the first hour so far, last night, but it seems to argue the Lamarkian and not the Darwinian view of biological change-over-time. Genes do not control our physical being but rather an inner intelligence located in the cell membrane (if I understand what I’ve seen so far). And the brain controls, ultimately the signal that the ‘mind’ of the cell acts upon. This seems weird, yet he presents an interesting analysis with good data (he talks VERY rapidly, so it’s a chore to listen). The upshot is that DNA programming can be overridden by mental intention? If so, how would this impact the intention of the eugenics folks…perhaps a counterattack of good intentions by the rest of us?? Can’t be.. but is this his thesis? (I need to finish the lecture when I get a chance)

        1. Robert Barricklow

          There is a lot in what you say. Just as digital is composed of ones & zeros; biology is much more than what science has uncovered so far. There is an unknown “spark of life” and unknown “consciousness” that is definitely in play, and as yet hidden. Still it’s presence is “felt” just by it’s unremarkable absence. As if the Life given to us, is special and can’t be quantified; no matter how many knowledgeable shoulders these wannabe Dr. Frankensteins stand upon.
          And yes, it is as they say/mind over matter.

        2. Hi Daniel

          I have seen the very presentation and found it fascinating. I watched the presentation with a friend and our understanding is that genes are like little switches, in that they require an external trigger much like going into a dark or dimly lit room and one flicks the light switch in order to add illumination.
          The trigger can be of different varieties with thoughts or beliefs being the main source he discusses. Thus we have his talk on conscious parenting and how the thought patterns of both mother and father influence prior to conception and throughout the development of the feotus.
          Although my friend and I could be way off on our interpretation.
          Would be interested in hearing what your final thoughts are once you have seen the rest of it.
          Feel free to contact me thebodyelectric at mail dot com
          🙂

  7. If these fools get away with this that will be the final proof there is no god. Or than he-she-it is the ultimate sadist enjoying this sick entertainment and there really no justice in this universe. Anyway they make more money making and keeping people sick. The dystopia we have to look forward is as I have written before is Robert Silverburg’s “Tower Of Glass” or the film “Zardos”

  8. I’ve been thinking thru the two most probablegame-changers and their present trajectories that are barreling down on us which are going to significantly impact the next five to ten years: AI/3-D Printed Robots and the new gene technologies as mentioned above. Specifically, and in a nutshell: The rise of the Bots is now here–one-to-two decades sooner than thought just a decade ago. This changes everything, and fast! In the next five to ten years, 20% of the US, UK and Japanese workforce will be replaced by Bots–and this will trigger a mass depop program.

    The slick new gene altering techs will be reserved for the first and second tier “Elites” to create/evolve/insure purity, health and permanence of two stratums of ” humans” who will be served by their warrior and worker Bots/Drones…

    The “other Bots,” the GMO-nanos and Food/drug/ vaccine/Chemtrails will be used to “create the Walker Dead Decade” as global pop is ” trimmed

  9. If we recall the policy of long term planning which seems to be present in these areas (though arguably not in many other ambients) we should try to solve THIS equation: a=drones/robots, b=GMsoldiers, c= ??????

  10. Yeah, they can genetically engineer a human with perfect health but what is the point as long as the environment is full of poison (i.e, hormones in meat, fluoride in water, mercury in vaccines, etc.)?

    1. It seems like just as soon as people start realizing that the vaccines given to baby boomers kicked off the rampant health issues we see manifesting today a fix comes out. Problem, reaction, solution.

      Increasing the body’s hepatic detox ability might allow mankind to survive and remain in this toxic soup, maybe. Trust me the toxin sh*t storm has yet to hit the fan.

    2. Hi Kitona, maybe alternatives for food would also be engineered. Also if the engineered human has perfect health it may well be that vaccines would be superfluous ?

      1. Robert Barricklow

        thebodyelectric

        Two pathways are available: you can modify the food you eat, or you can alter your metabolism.
        I’m assuming, from your non de plum that the radioactive isotope gadolinium-148 would be somewhere down an electric avenue you’ve previously visited. where you could build nano-robots to course through your veins, assisting your body’s cells with their basic metabolic processes. The safely energized millions of microscopic bots with gadolinium-148 would be suffice to power your body through its daily activities. {half-life of 75 years]. Your probably are very active, so a snack every decade, or so, would assure your always at your peak.

Comments are closed.