Advertising the Post-Human Future
Advertising the Post-Human Future
Tim O’Connor – Center for the Preservation of Humanity- 1/10/2023
In the Garden of Eden the serpent promised Eve that if she ate of the fruit she would not die. God told her not to touch it, let alone eat it, and if she did, she would die. This implies that prior to eating the fruit, she wouldn’t die. But, she was beguiled, ate the fruit, and now human beings die. Our days, according to the Bible, is supposed to be around 120 years – we make it to around 75 or 80 usually. Throughout history there have been myriad efforts made by men to avoid death to no avail. Instead of understanding that humans are promised eternal life by believing in God, believing in Jesus, and being obedient to God, mankind still seeks to avoid death on this planet, on this plane of existence, in this dimension.
Science, in general, is where mankind’s hopes to live forever rest. Every now and then there are articles in any of a number of publications suggesting that science can beat death. There are even political movements built around the concept. Generally referred to as transhumanism, all of this is an effort to create a post-human world. The prefix trans- refers to on the other side of or change. The prefix post- points to the idea of something which comes after or later. Both transhumanism and post-humanism refer to a future without human beings as they are understood today. Articles expounding upon the ideas that human beings can be ‘fixed’ in order to avoid death are really only promising the same thing the serpent promised and that the future will not have human beings – death and genocide.
The promise is living a longer life through life-extension technologies. Who doesn’t want to live a longer life? Most people welcome the idea. When confronted with real facts; however, their desire to live to be 400 years old really only amounts to one thing – they are living lives which will condemn them to Hell and they know it and have no intention of changing that fact. So, the rationale becomes one of avoiding justice. Anyone who has listened to any of these people speak or read what they have written should be able to readily identify that sentiment. They hate God, they are typically extremely arrogant, and they are exceedingly delusional.
Before the technologies can be developed and used; however, bioethics needs to justify it. And they have according to science anyway. On the National Institutes of Health website there is a rather lengthy discussion by Authur L. Caplan. Death as an unnatural process concludes:
“The explanation of why ageing occurs has many of the attributes of a stochastic or chance phenomenon. And this makes ageing unnatural and in no way an intrinsic part of human nature. As such, there is no reason why it is intrinsically wrong to try to reverse or cure ageing. There may be external reasons—cost, inequity, or even a fear that the overall quality of life will diminish—but without more argument and more empirical evidence these worries seem exactly that: worries. Those who want to make the case against treating ageing as a disease must show why human beings are not capable of solving the challenges that a longer life expectancy would create. There is no intrinsic ethical reason why we should not try to extend our lives.” [italics mine]
In this 3,549 word passage, Caplan mentions God twice. The first reference to God raises the exact same issue which I am raising here, “God, as a punishment for the sins of our ancestors in the Garden of Eden, caused humans to age and die. In this view, people age because the Creator saw fit to design them in that way for retribution or punishment. Ageing serves as a reminder of our moral fallibility and weakness.”
After raising the question, Caplan, answers, “Whereas the theological explanation of ageing may carry great weight, it will simply not do as a scientific explanation. Medical professionals may have to cope with their own religious feelings and their patients advocating this explanation. But, from a scientific perspective, it will hardly do to claim that ageing, as a result of God's vindictiveness, is a natural biological process that is not worthy of treatment.”
Caplan’s argument is basically science is more important than God. Caplan is advocating for the wholesale and widespread acceptance of the idea that God messed up by making humans (and everything else) that ages and science will ‘fix’ this whole aging thing. The way they put this argument omits God entirely: death, itself is a disease which can, and should be, cured according to Caplan and others. But, just because the guy hates God, he decided to ill-advisedly throw in the adjective vindictive. No respect for God, no respect for the morals in the Bible – Caplan, and all of his peers, have also decided to hijack the term morals, replace them with their own ethics, and attempt to reassert their self-styled ethics as universal morals. His article has been around since 2005.
NPR published an article in 2010 about the idea of ‘curing’ death. Surprisingly, the author, Ursula Goodenough, came to the same conclusions that I am going to come to. Despite advertising the potential for science to conquer God (she even mentions that humans seem to have about 120 years at most), her conclusion is telling. “I think of my finite life cycle as a gift, or at least a gift by comparison with the dreary notion of endless existence. Its finiteness allows me to do my thing, make my mistakes, achieve my successes, love and nurture my family and community, run my course like every other critter, and then move out of the way.”
Goodenough’s argument is one Caplan also addressed. He deemed it faulty in order to reach the conclusion that life extension should be pursued. The argument Caplan made was that it isn’t about just getting out of the way so that the new can take over. Yet, Goodenough, a biologist herself, who, coincidentally has also established herself as a New Age religious founder, wrote that basically, if life is forever, that life would become absolutely meaningless. “I confess that I find the whole trajectory to vastly miss the point of being alive which, I would say, is not how long it’s going to last but what it’s like to have it.” Even a person as deluded as Goodenough is found cause to realize this fact. The Bible puts the argument slightly differently in Matthew 5:13 – “You are salt for the Land. But if salt becomes tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything except being thrown out for people to trample on.” An earthly life that lasts forever will lose it’s saltiness.
A political pioneer, Zoltan Istvan, who ran for president of the US in 2016 as the Transhumanist Party candidate, authored an article in 2019 which appeared in the United Kingdom’s Metro. Istvan has no qualms about hating God as he does so very publicly, and has gained quite a few followers who also hate God, “Billionaires, scientists, and entrepreneurs have arrived at the revolutionary conclusion that the human body can be dramatically remade into something better, stronger, and far longer lasting.” He continues on in his article, “I think the first step in getting this figure to decrease is for governments around the world to declare ageing a disease.”
Like Caplan, Istvan dismisses any argument which does not support his desired outcome for a post-human world brought about through transhumanism and the radical life extension envisioned by it’s adherents. Istvan writes:
“Around 80% of the world’s population are religious, many believing in some form of life after death.
“Because of this, it can be argued that many see dying as part of life. This is something transhumanists refer to as ‘deathist’ culture.
“Religion aside, some raise the argument that in eliminating death, we also eliminate value in life; these people believe death gives our lives meaning.
“In my mind, it’s highly unlikely we’ll find ourselves bored or devoid of meaning in the future, just because we don’t die.
“Especially since in the near future — by 2050 according to Historian Yuval Noah Harari — our bodies will likely be merged with AI and we’ll likely know ourselves and what we like better than we do today.”
Istvan made a really poor choice by deferring any authority on the topic to Noah Yuval Harari. Harari is the brain trust of the World Economic Forum and has authored several books demonstrating his complete moral degeneracy. He’s the one that has claimed that humans are hackable animals, that God did not create us, and that we will be demanded to augment and upgrade ourselves. But consider how human one would be when we have artificial intelligence embedded into our brains and it does our thinking for us. Well, we won’t be human at that point because the AI will do our thinking for us – it’s a post-human world both men are alluding to, “we need to try to understand the future values of a world where we are literally a different being.”
And that brings about the concept of what kind of technological advances are going to be made in order to fulfill the creation of the Ubermenchen? That is German for supermen and I used that very intentionally because the idea of actually trying to do this was realized by one individual more than any other. Eugenics, which transhumanism is, was taken to it’s logical conclusion by Adolph Hitler. Nonetheless, Istvan tells us that genetic editing, merging with machines, creating cloud-based versions of ourselves, bionic organs, cryogenics, and ‘medicine’ are the pathways to ‘curing’ death. Goodenough also noted some of the means to achieve immortality through science:
“To avoid dying means not only dodging disease bullets -- Kurzweil is intrigued by the concept of nanomachines that will travel through the body and repair cellular damage -- but also postponing or reversing the aging process itself, because most diseases take their mortal toll largely on the elderly. Taxpayers already support a National Institute on Aging as well as many university-based research programs wherein the normal lifespans of various experimental organisms, from worms to flies to mice, have been modestly extended via gene mutations, caloric restrictions, anti-oxidant regimes, and other regimes.”
And, as a side note, those nanotechnologies have been rigorously argued for being put in human bodies by medical ‘professionals’, bioethicists, and others who seek to control humanity’s ability to continue living under the guise of medical surveillance. Also, the US federal government including the FDA, USDA, and other relevant regulatory agencies have refused to touch the idea of nanotechnologies in our food supply. If we are what we eat I don’t want to know what FDA and USDA ‘leaders’ are eating because they are full of crap.
On July 15, 2021, in the middle of people dropping dead from the most devastating medically-endorsed and medically-organized murder spree ever committed, Popular Mechanics published “Can Science Cure Death? It Sure Looks Like It.” This super-fluffy article doesn’t really deliver on it’s headline but it does relay some information. The most important part of the article is the discussion about David Sinclair and his unified theory of aging. The article lays out his theory:
“Sinclair believes we will solve aging. But living forever is an ambitious project, and while Sinclair does not believe there is an upper limit on human lifespan, he is realistic about how quickly we can push the current average. It’s still not clear how, exactly, to tweak the knobs of longevity to increase our lifespan far past current levels, but Sinclair, at least, has an idea about which knobs are most important. His most substantial contribution to longevity is what he calls the first real unified theory of aging—a single mechanism he believes explains various types of cellular dysfunction (those hallmarks of aging we mentioned earlier). Sinclair says getting old is a problem of information loss, a dysfunction in the way DNA is read and implemented in cells. He’s basically putting all his money on the epigenome, a flexible DNA interpreter that turns genes on and off based on environmental conditions.
“As we live, our DNA takes damage from stressors such as UV rays, stress hormones, and X-rays. Certain families of proteins (sirtuins, for example, a family of enzymes that manage the DNA reader) can repair damaged DNA, but while they are doing it, they are unavailable to perform their usual epigenetic work, protecting other genes and preventing unnecessary genes from being transcribed. When the proteins finish making the repairs, they sometimes don’t go back to the places they came from, leading to a progressive sloppiness in how genes are implemented all over the body.”
The other important piece of information included in the article is the World Health Organization’s declaration that aging is a disease. Please remember, the WHO is currently in the process of drafting a public health treaty which is binding regarding pandemics. Since all of us age because time, in fact, exists (despite those who claim otherwise), the WHO would easily be able to cast aging as a pandemic and issue decrees and dictates which every individual will be forced to comply with or else. The overview on aging the WHO has online already establishes the precedent:
“Every person – in every country in the world – should have the opportunity to live a long and healthy life. Yet, the environments in which we live can favour health or be harmful to it. Environments are highly influential on our behaviour and our exposure to health risks (for example, air pollution or violence), our access to services (for example, health and social care) and the opportunities that ageing brings.
“The number and proportion of people aged 60 years and older in the population is increasing. In 2019, the number of people aged 60 years and older was 1 billion. This number will increase to 1.4 billion by 2030 and 2.1 billion by 2050. This increase is occurring at an unprecedented pace and will accelerate in coming decades, particularly in developing countries.
“This historically significant change in the global population requires adaptations to the way societies are structured across all sectors. For example, health and social care, transportation, housing and urban planning. Working to make the world more age-friendly is an essential and urgent part of our changing demographics.”
Now, the WHO, and many others – especially those in global governance, academia, and NGO’s – think that one of the major problems on earth is overpopulation. Now, if aging is a disease and can be ‘cured’ spurring massively increased lifespans for human beings, which one of these ideologies win. This is not a rhetorical question, it is a question which is being answered for us because we are not supposed to know the question even exists. Instead we are encouraged to imagine that it will be ourselves who can live forever. That is a gigantic lie – almost all of us require death for this plan to work the way any transhumanist or post-humanist plan to come to fruition.
The argument is that there are 8 billion people and that is already too many. That population is going to go to 10 billion and possible higher. When the question is approached by the elites who think they will absolutely live through the massive human genocide they have planned, they always allude to a much smaller human population. Bill Gates did this, famously, while explaining, P x S x E x C = CO2. So have Eric Pianka, Prince Philip, Ted Turner, and King Charles III. Most of these wonderful people have revealed their intentions in relation to climate change mitigation. Have you ever read through Agenda 21 – the entire thing is a blueprint for mass extinction of the human race. So are the UN’s SDGs. If there are already too many people why would these elites not attempt to murder everyone else except for their preferred 500 million people who get to survive? Were you essential or non-essential? The non-essential are already marked for extermination. With over half of the population no longer alive, many in the essential camp will then be able to be declared non-essential. These elites will recycle this ploy until they reach their ideal population. There is a reason that the Georgia Guidestones were torn down – it promises a future world population of 500 million, a 95% reduction.
Of those 500 million or so ‘survivors’ about 3 or 4 million elites (that figure is an estimate which is probably way too large) will control everyone else. Cyborgs are able to be digitally controlled. Chimeras will be genetically manipulated for compliance. Digital creations of human beings are not human beings at all and neither are the chimeric nor cyborg versions of human beings the post-humanists and transhumanist seek to create for their own leisure and well being.
Just as the serpent lied to Eve, these demonically inspired transhumanists and post-humanists are promising all of us death while they lie to us about living forever. They have already demonstrated their desire to murder billions of us with their COVID-19 ‘vaccinations.’ Interestingly, the injection is actually a gene therapy being called a vaccine to avoid the liability for death and damage done to those being injected. It is through gene therapies which is at the forefront of the post-human world. And it is being advertised, constantly. Those who understand what they are being sold and refuse to buy it are being targeted for re-education. In all of the articles mentioned above, education about ‘the science’ of living forever and breaking through moral barriers is at the forefront of the agenda.
I suggest we all go read our Bible. The authorities on this earth only value whatever they have deemed to be rational thought. Before any of us realize it, our Bibles will be outlawed and those who possess one or believe the knowledge which is inside of it will be re-educated. If we cannot be re-educated we will be thrown in prison. We will be tortured. We will be murdered. If you cannot discern that, I don’t know what to tell you except to go look into the matter for yourself. I have written a great many articles, some of which detail these events unfolding with sources. We all need to read our Bible more often, pray more wholeheartedly, seek forgiveness and repent, and rely on that which gives eternal life for real – God and the sacrifice of Jesus – not the lies of these genocidal men and women.
Bless God and God bless.