CLAMP DOWN ON DU-INTEL PT. 2 OF 7

Ardisson, kapo sioniste

Liberté d’expression dites-vous ?
Video sent by xclio

“France, pays de liberté…choisie, je vous l’explique dans cette vidéo avec un exemple très révélateur sur la situation de la liberté en France notamment la liberté d’expression.”

This History Of Political Correctness

Analyzing Global-warming Science

SOURCE
By: William F. Jasper, February 18, 2008

Dr. Arthur Robinson is a professor of chemistry and is cofounder of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, which was created in 1980 to conduct basic and applied research in subjects applicable to increasing the quality, quantity, and length of human life. As part of his work, he edits the newsletter Access to Energy.

Dr. Robinson, in collaboration with other scientists, was one of the early critics of doomsday global-warming theories. He has authored articles and created video presentations demonstrating that the hypothesis of human-caused global warming is wrong, showing that the hypothesis is not supported by the observable evidence. To come to this conclusion, Professor Robinson and his colleagues brought together the findings of hundreds of peer-reviewed studies about all aspects of the global-warming hypothesis.

---

THE NEW AMERICAN: Flip on any channel, open any newspaper or magazine, and it’s clear we are being bombarded with the message that the Earth is warming. Is there any merit to this claim?Dr. Arthur Robinson: Yes, but the temperature is only going up 0.5° C per century. Moreover, this increase is not being caused by human activity.TNA: Those who blame mankind for causing global warming would respond to that point by saying that the Earth is the warmest it’s been in 400 years, and that’s significant.Dr. Robinson: They’re right, but they only show you the data from the last 400 years. If the data for a longer time interval is considered, temperatures today are seen to be not especially warm. The current temperature is about average for the past 3,000 years. It was much warmer during the Medieval Climate Optimum 1,000 years ago (see Figure 1). The climate, as we know from historical records, was just fine during that warm period. In fact, it was a little better. So, yes, it is the warmest in 400 years.Moreover, the temperature, which is going up very slowly, is correlated with the sun’s activity, not hydrocarbon use (see Figure 3).TNA: Those same people would say that science has spoken, that CO^₂ is the cause. What do you say?Dr. Robinson: Gore, et al., tell us that CO^₂ is a pollutant, and that humans have caused this terrible problem. But actually the atmosphere contains lots of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide, water, and oxygen are required for life. Without these substances in the atmosphere, life would not be possible. All of the carbon in our bodies originates as atmospheric carbon dioxide. Plus, we’re only adding moderately and temporarily to CO^₂ levels. Carbon dioxide moves through the atmosphere on its way to the oceans and biosphere. Human use has caused a transient increase during the past century — from about 0.03 percent to 0.04 percent of atmospheric molecules. Man is producing about 8 gigatons per year, and yet there are 40,000 gigatons in the biosphere and oceans.TNA: Which come from?Dr. Robinson: Which are just there — created as part of nature. Between 1880 and 1890, the level of CO^₂ in the atmosphere was about 295 ppm [parts per million]. For comparison, this office right now is rising toward 1,000 ppm because we’re all exhaling carbon dioxide.The human-caused increase in the atmosphere is not permanent, but temporary. This increase is only being maintained by our production and, as soon as we stop producing at some later time when our technology advances, it will go back to its naturally controlled level.When we use hydrocarbons, the resulting carbon dioxide goes through the atmosphere on its way to the oceans and biosphere, so there is a rise in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide has a very short half-time of about seven years in the atmosphere. However, while it is in higher concentration, it is wonderful for us because it makes our plants grow faster, which markedly increases the amounts and diversity of plant and animal life.TNA: Al Gore also says that the UN’s IPCC has spoken, and the debate is over, because there is a consensus. What do you say to that?Dr. Robinson: Right now the UN claims that they have about 2,500 people involved in this and about 600 scientists seriously involved. This is what Al Gore would point to today.We have more than 22,000 scientist signers of our global-warming petition who’ve looked at the issue and concluded essentially the opposite of these United Nations people. This says nothing about the science. Science does not depend on polling. Just because we have 22,000, and the UN may have 600, does not matter. The only thing our petition demonstrates is that there is no consensus among scientists in support of the UN claims.

Scientific questions are never settled in this way. Science is about natural truth. The truth doesn’t require any advocate. It stands by itself.

In science, a scientist may discover the truth about something. Then he develops a hypothesis, and the hypothesis is tested by various means. So long as the hypothesis passes experimental tests, it becomes stronger and is further relied upon — unless it fails an experimental test. If it is a very fine hypothesis with wide utility, it may spread throughout the entire scientific community and become part of the basis of scientific knowledge. The process by which this is done is not what is important. The truth is important. Scientific truth is not determined by polling or by convening meetings.

TNA: But when looking at the pronouncements of the United Nations — IPCC and the media, the average viewer would be led to believe that they’ve figured global warming out.

Dr. Robinson: Climate science is a very primitive science. The atmosphere is a complicated system, somewhat similar to human biochemistry. We know some things, but we don’t know most of the needed facts. As you know, climatologists have trouble predicting the weather a week or two in advance. They surely cannot predict climate many years in the future.

There are some very fine scientists, like Richard Lindzen at MIT, who work on the details of climate theory and attempt to understand the atmosphere in detail. They are inching forward toward the eventual solution of this very complex system. Today, this system can only be evaluated empirically because it is not yet understood.
We can show that the hypothesis of human-caused global warming is false, however, because we have enough empirical data to falsify this hypothesis. Human-caused global warming is a hypothesis that has failed so many experimental tests that it is clearly without merit.

TNA: To the average person, those IPCC reports look very authoritative, very intimidating. It looks to us like a battle between two sides of experts. How do we know whom to believe?

Dr. Robinson: First, just because the UN has spent an enormous amount of money to convene meetings of 600 mostly self-interested people — many of whom are receiving research grants and other perks for participating — to try to determine something that isn’t knowable with current data and techniques, and produce a report, proves nothing.

Moreover, many of these 600 disagree with the conclusions that the UN-IPCC advertises. The scientists are never allowed to approve or disapprove the final report, and many of the comments that they submit for publication in the report are rejected by UN bureaucrats.

First, the report that is initially released to the public by the UN-IPCC is an executive summary put together by a handful of people including bureaucrats, politicians, UN operatives, and a few scientists. They issue a summary report with UN propaganda in it. They then go back to the reports of the 600 scientists and insert sentences into those reports so that they will conform to the summary.

At no time in this process do the 600 ever vote approval or disapproval of their own report or of the summary report. So this report is not even approved by the people who are claimed to have authored it. This is a fraudulent process.

TNA: Don’t they use the same set of data as you do?

Dr. Robinson: Yes, for the most part. Except that they often unethically omit that part of the data that does not agree with their hypothesis. They pick the parts of the data that favor their conclusion and discard the rest.

If you play with the data, you can falsify with it. So the UN is picking parts of the data. We are considering it all.

TNA: Scientists who are not intimidated to speak out about this are typically charged by the enviros as being paid by the oil companies.

Dr. Robinson: Well, we’ve never been fortunate enough to receive any money from them, and I mean in any way, personally, professionally in our laboratory, or anything. We have never received a dime from anybody who has a specific economic interest in this issue. However, UN power to control and ration world energy — the real goal of their activities — would have a terrible, negative impact on the lives of all Americans. In that sense, all of our supporters have an economic interest.

TNA: Al Gore also makes a big deal about glacier recession.

Dr. Robinson: But he only shows the data for the limited time intervals that seem to support his claims. Here is the world glacier curve (see Figure 2) based on an average of all the world’s glaciers for which there are good records. Some glaciers are actually increasing, but on average the glaciers are decreasing — toward the more normal lengths that are typical of long-term average world temperatures. This curve is offset by 20 years because there is about a 20-year lag between the temperature increase and the shortening of the glaciers.

So the temperature increase reflected in the glacier lengths begins in about 1800. The glaciers have been shortening for 200 years. They started shortening a century before significant amounts of CO^₂ were produced by human activity. Notice also that the shortening is linear. Hydrocarbon use increased six-fold and the glacier melting rate did not change at all.

The glaciers started shortening long before we were using significant amounts of hydrocarbons, and, when we increased our use by six-fold, the shortening rate did not change. Therefore, human hydrocarbon use is evidently not the cause of glacier shortening or the mild natural temperature increase that is causing that shortening.

TNA: So what is causing the Earth to warm?

Dr. Robinson: A good clue is contained in data showing arctic air temperature vs. solar activity (see Figure 3). There is a good correlation. Surface temperature vs. solar activity data also correlates well (see Figure 4).

TNA: What about Gore’s demonstration in his movie, with those very large graphs, that CO^₂ tracks right along with temperature and is, therefore, the cause of that warming?

Dr. Robinson: In those curves, the temperature goes up before the CO^₂ and goes down before the CO_². The CO_² lags the temperature. And the reason it does is that the CO_² rise is caused by the temperature rise rather than vice versa. As temperatures rise, carbon dioxide is released from the oceans, just as the carbon dioxide is released from soft drinks when their temperature rises. Gore shows the curves with poor resolution, so that this cannot be seen by the viewer. His film is filled with dozens of other deliberate errors and misrepresentations.

My favorite is the part where Gore says that “the scientists who specialize in global warming have computer models that long ago predicted this range of temperature increase.” He then displays a graph of their alleged “predictions” and the claimed actual temperatures.

This graph is bogus in several ways, but the most striking is that the computer-predicted curve begins in 1938 — before either Al Gore or the computer had been invented. Unless Al Gore invented the computer before he was born, and didn’t show it to anybody but climate modelers until after WWII, this is impossible, because there were no computers in 1938!

TNA: Speaking of computers, allowing the UN to take over the world’s energy would have a big effect on our higher standard of living, would it not?

Dr. Robinson: An estimated nine percent of the energy of the United States is now used to power computers and the Internet. This technology cannot exist without energy. Automobiles require energy. You cannot warm your home without energy.

If the UN controls, rations, and taxes energy, they will have the power to determine whether you can run a wood stove, whether you can run an automobile, or can use any of the technology that makes our modern life possible.

When you say this to people, their eyes glaze over. They don’t believe it’s going to happen.

The power to tax and ration energy is the power to control the world — to have life and death control over every human being on the planet. No government should ever have this power. The United Nations-IPCC process is not about the climate or saving the environment. It is about power and money — lots of it.

Should Gore and the UN succeed, the effect will not only be diminished prosperity in the United States. In underdeveloped countries, billions of people are lifting themselves from poverty by means of hydrocarbon energy. If their energy supplies are rationed and taxed, they will slip backwards into poverty, misery, and death. This fits the population control agenda of the United Nations.

If the misuse and falsification of the scientific method that drives the human-caused global-warming mania succeeds, it will cause the greatest acts of human genocide the world has ever known. It must be stopped.”

=======

=======

my comment: i know the last paragraph sounds kooky, but it fits perfectly with al gore’s background.
what better motive than global population reduction could cause someone like al gore to promote the global warming hoax?
al gore is a prominent CFR member and 33rd degree freemason, you really think he’s concerned with ecology except as a means to increase the elites’ power?

“Vice President Al Gore Jr. is the son of former United States Senator Al Gore Sr, whose major benefactor was Armand Heimer [aka Hammer], who in turn was the son of Dr. Julius Heimer [aka Hammer], founder of the American Communist Party. To this day Al Gore Jr. presents the “prestigious” HAMMER award for Government Efficiency.”

Manipulating Matter: The Scientific Dictatorship as a Project in the Reconfiguration of Reality

this article was found here.

– by Phillip D. Collins ©, Feb. 15th, 2005

Comenius addressed the first formal scientists as “illuminati” and outlined their scientific purpose, “…which is to secure…the empire of the human mind over matter.”

In the article entitled “The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship”, we examined the transmogrification of the elite’s religious power structure into a technocratic oligarchy legitimized predominantly by science. The history and background of this “scientific dictatorship” is a conspiracy, created and micro-managed by the historical tide of Darwinism, which has its foundations in Freemasonry. In this article, we shall examine the “scientific dictatorship” as an enormous project in the re-sculpting of reality itself.

The Technocracy

Freemason Aldous Huxley coined the term “scientific dictatorship” and presented an allegorized version of the concept in his famous roman ‘a clef entitled Brave New World. Huxley was mentored by Freemason H.G. Wells, who also presented a fictionalized “scientific dictatorship” under the appellation of the “Technocracy.” This is an interesting designation for a world government managed by functional elites and scientists. It is derived from the Greek word techne, which means craft. Given Wells’ membership in the Craft of Freemasonry, the synchronicity becomes apparent.

Moreover, the term craft is associated with witchcraft or wicca. From the term wicca, one derives the word wicker (Hoffman, 63). Examining this word a little closer, Michael Hoffman explains: “The word wicker has many denotations and connotations, one of which is ‘to bend,’ as in the ‘bending’ of reality’” (Hoffman, 63). This is especially interesting when considering the words of Mark Pesce, co-inventor of Virtual Reality Modeling Language. Pesce writes: “The enduring archetype of techne within the pre-Modern era is magic, of an environment that conforms entirely to the will of being” (Pesce).

Techne is also from whence the word technology is derived. The significance of this fact becomes evident when Pesce opines:

Each endpoint of techne has an expression in the modern world as a myth of fundamental direction — the mastery of matter, and the collection of spirit. The myth of matter comes to its end as the absolute expression of will as artifact; in a word, nanotechnology (Pesce).

Herein is the final objective of New World Order … the reconfiguration of reality through the sorcery of technology.

Radical Empiricism: The Epistemological Pretext for Re-Sculpting Reality

As we have established in previous articles, most of contemporary science is predicated upon empiricism. This is the epistemological stance that all knowledge is derived exclusively through the senses. Lyndon LaRouche explains the inherent flaws of empiricism:

By the nature of our processes of sense-perception, our direct perception of the world “outside our skins” (so to speak) does not show us that world “outside our skins,” but, rather, the impact of that unperceived real world upon the biology of our mental-sensory processes. In other words, the shadows on the wall of Plato’s Cave (LaRouche).

Thus, the world becomes little more than an ever-shifting pliancy of impressions. All that a percipient surveys is an amorphous amalgam of “shadows.” It comes as little surprise that an exclusively empirical approach relegates causality to the realm of metaphysical fantasy. The obviation of causality holds enormous ramifications for science.

What is perceived as A causing B could be merely a consequence of circumstantial juxtaposition. Although temporal succession and spatial proximity are axiomatic, causal connection is not. Affirmation of causal relationships is impossible. Given the absence of causality, all of a scientist’s findings must be taken upon faith. Ironically, science relies on the affirmation of such cause and effect relationships. This is all one can deduce while working under the paradigm of radical empiricism. Thus, the elite merely exchanged one form of mysticism for another. It comes as little surprise that, within certain occult circles, contemporary science is considered sorcery disseminated on the popular level. For instance, Satanic high priest Anton LaVey regarded science and technology as “sanctioned, but ineffectual ‘occultism’” (Raschke, 214).

In fact, science has become a new form of sorcery for the manipulation of matter. According to the epistemology of empiricism, reality is little more than a quagmire of impressions. It is analogous to a holograph, the fabric of which is pliable enough to be manipulated. Thus, reality becomes the ever-shifting canvas upon which scientists paint whatever they wish. The scientist’s role in this reconfiguration of reality was delineated in an esoteric tract entitled The Way of Light. Authored by Comenius in 1668, the manifesto was dedicated to the British Royal Society. Researcher Michael Hoffman elaborates:

In it, Comenius addressed the first formal scientists as “illuminati” and outlined their scientific purpose, “…which is to secure…the empire of the human mind over matter” [emphasis added] (Hoffman, 23).

Years later, Bertrand Russell would recapitulate the “illuminati’s” (i.e., scientists’) role in the establishment of “the empire of the human mind over matter.” Redefining science as an instrument of radical empiricism, Russell wrote:

The way in which science arrives at its beliefs is quite different from that of medieval theology. Experience has shown that it is dangerous to start from general principles and proceed deductively, both because the principles may be untrue and because the reasoning based upon them may be fallacious. Science starts, not from large assumptions, but from particular facts discovered by observation or experiment. From a number of such facts a general rule is arrived at, of which, if it is true, the facts in question are instances… Science thus encourages abandonment of the search for absolute truth, which belongs to any theory that can be successfully employed in inventions or in predicting the future. “Technical” truth is a matter of degree: a theory from which more successful inventions and predictions spring is truer than one which gives rise to fewer. “Knowledge” ceases to be a mental mirror of the universe, and becomes merely a practical tool in the manipulation of matter [emphasis added] (Russell, 13 – 15).

In other words, science or “knowledge” becomes the instrument by which the “illuminati” re-sculpts reality. It also becomes an epistemological weapon against the minds of men, wielded by the proverbial Descartean “evil demon.” This was the central precept of Weishaupt’s Illuminati and the conceit of the Technocracy today: God was not in the beginning, but evolved from Man in the end. According to this conceit, Man could recreate Eden without the God. It comes as little surprise that sci-fi predictive programmer and British intelligence asset Arthur C. Clarke commented: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”

The Global Holodeck

The technocratic agenda of reconfiguring the “holograph of reality” is most clearly delineated by William Sims Bainbridge, sociologist and member of the National Science Foundation. Citing sci-fi predictive programmer Gene Roddenberry, Bainbridge writes:

An interesting feature of the popular Star Trek universe is that mass-media popular culture is absent from its fictional future world. Several characters play musical instruments and the preferred styles of music are classical, whether European or belonging to some other high culture. Perhaps precisely because the characters are living very future-oriented lives, they turn to historical sources like Mozart for their aesthetic recreation. Presumably, the copyrights have all expired. Instead of passively watching television programmes and movies, they programme their own “holodeck” virtual reality dramas in which they play active roles, often with historical settings. Government is certainly not in the science fiction business, but government-encouraged research is currently developing the technology to realise the Star Trek prophecies (Bainbridge, “Memorials”).

Evidently, government-sponsored research programs are already dedicated to the Technocracy’s vision of re-sculpting reality. Bainbridge is certainly no stranger to this vision, as is evidenced by his association with Scientology. In Religion and the Social Order, Bainbridge presented a mandate for scientists to become “religious engineers” in the development of a new world religion (Bainbridge, “New Religions, Science, and Secularization“). This new world religion, which Bainbridge calls a “Church of God Galactic,” would find its origins with science fiction literature (Bainbridge, “Religions for a Galactic Civilization“). In the formulation of his “Church,” Bainbridge used the scientistic cult of Scientology as a working model:

Today there exists one highly effective religion actually derived from science fiction, one which fits all the known sociological requirements for a successful Church of God Galactic. I refer, of course, to Scientology (Bainbridge, “Religions for a Galactic Civilization”).

In the Scientologist bible, L. Ron Hubbard’s Dianetics, one finds a reiteration of Comenius’ mission statement delivered to the “illuminati” (i.e., scientists). Hubbard states:

Man has something more: some people call it imagination, some call it this or call it that; but whatever it is called, it adds up to the interesting fact that man is not content merely to “face reality” as most other life forms are. Man makes reality face him. Propaganda about “the necessity of facing reality,” like propaganda to the effect that a man could be driven mad by a “childhood delusion” (whatever that is), does not face the reality that where the beaver down his ages of evolution built mud dams and keeps on building mud dams, man graduates in a half century from a stone and wood dam to make a mill wheel pond to structures like Grand Coulee Dam, and changes the whole and entire aspect of a respectable portion of nature’s real estate from a desert to productive soil, from a flow of water to lightening bolts (Hubbard, 308).

It is very interesting that Hubbard would cite the Grand Coulee Dam as an instant when man “made reality face him.” Discussing the “Saturnian-masonic” era of erecting megalithic structures, Hoffman observes:

Actually, with some crucial exceptions, the rise of the megaliths marked the rise of the Hermetic Academy into its dominant physical phase. The theory is that the megaliths “pin down” natural forces, helping to subdue nature’s most savage furies. We marvel today at the Hoover Dam but that symbol laden construction is but a crude parody of the technology of the megaliths which helped to “dam” the wildest forces of nature (Hoffman, 21).

Evidently, men like Hubbard and Bainbridge see something entirely different when they view structures like the Grand Coulee Dam and the Hoover Dam. They are viewing the “endpoint of techne — the mastery of matter.” It is the Technocracy’s project in consciously shaping the terrain of the global holodeck.

The “Hive Mind”

As was established in the previous article covering this topic, Darwin’s theory of evolution was cribbed liberally from Freemasonry’s occult doctrine of “becoming.” According to this doctrine, humanity was gradually evolving towards apotheosis. The architecture of Masonry’s evolutionary mythology is a counterpart to the Biblical account humanity’s expulsion from Eden. However, there are some major modifications. In The Meaning of Masonry, W.L. Wilmshurst alleges that:

In all Scriptures and cosmologies the tradition is universal of a “Golden Age,” an age of comparative innocence, wisdom and spirituality, in which racial unity [emphasis added], and individual happiness and enlightenment prevailed; in which there was that open vision for want of which a people perisheth, but in virtue of which men were once in conscious conversation with the unseen world and were shepherded, taught and guided by the “gods” or discarnate superintendents of the infant race, who imparted to them the sure and indefeasible principles upon which their spiritual welfare and evolution [emphasis added] depended (Wilmshurst, 173).

However, Wilmshurst contends that a peregrination of human consciousness away from the “racial mind” caused humanity to fall from its former glory:

The tradition is also universal of the collective soul [emphasis added] of the human race having sustained a “fall,” a moral declension from its true path of life and evolution [emphasis added], which has severed it almost entirely from its creative source, and which, as the ages advanced, has involved its sinking more and more deeply into physical conditions, its splitting up from unity employing a single language into a diversity of conflicting races of different speeches and degrees of moral advancement [emphasis added], accompanied by a progressive densification of the material body and a corresponding darkening of the mind and atrophy of the spiritual consciousness (Wilmshurst, 173).

Recall Pesce’s statement that techne was expressed in the modern world as the “collection of spirit.” This is precisely the objective of Masonry… the “collection of spirit” through the facilitation of evolution! Wilmshurst proceeds to reveal the chief means by which this will be achieved:

Unable to effect its [Man's] own recovery it required skilled scientific [emphasis added] assistance from other sources to bring about its restoration. Whence could come that skill and scientific [emphasis added] knowledge if not from the Divine and now invisible world, from those “gods” and angelic guardians of the erring race of whom all ancient traditions and sacred writings tell? Would not that regenerative method be properly described if it were called, as in Masonry it is called, a “heavenly science” [emphasis added], and welcomed in the words that Masons in fact use, “Hail, Royal Art!” (Wilmshurst, 175).

Can there be any wonder why Freemasons Aldous Huxley and H.G. Wells were proponents of a “scientific dictatorship?” It is an intrinsic feature of their Masonic heritage. This heritage led them to bestow absolute epistemological primacy upon Science, spelled with a “S” to denote its divine role in man’s purported ascent towards apotheosis and the reconstitution of the Masonic “collective soul.” This is scientism. In a speech before the Royal Institute of International Affairs in 1936, H.G. Wells succinctly expressed the core precept of scientism:

“At first the realization of the ineffectiveness of our best thought and knowledge struck only a few people, like Mr. Maynard Keynes, for example… It is science and not men of science that we want to enlighten and animate our politics and rule the world” (qutd. in Keith, Mind Control, World Control, 306 – 307).

Wells also wrote about the mythological “collective soul,” which he dubbed “The Mind of the Race.” W. Warren Wagar elaborates on Wells’ “racial mind” doctrine:

It was at once the capstone and the mortar of his [Wells'] faith: a belief in the emergence in human evolution of a collective racial being with the collective racial mind, which gathered the results of the individual mental effort into a single fund of racial wisdom and grew gradually toward organic consciousness of itself. Individuals could escape the frustration inherent in the fact of their individuality and mortality only by consecrating their lives to the service of the Mind of the Race (Wagar, 100 – 101).

Wells believed that the final coalescence of human consciousness into a “racial mind” would result in the emergence not of a mere man, but of perfected Man with a capitalized M (Wagar, 104). The M is capitalized to denote the purported divinity that is dormant within humanity. Wells’ Weltanschauung remained consistent with the Masonic themes of a “collective soul” and man’s evolutionary ascent towards deification. In H.G. Wells and the World State, author Warren Wagar elaborates:

But the transcendent reality Wells actually professed to see emerging here and now was the collective being of humanity, rather than any “God.” At the level of the individual the species Homo sapiens might be nothing more than a swarm of unique individuals descended in an unbroken sequence from remote protozoan ancestors; yet Homo sapiens was more than a name. At this moment in cosmic time it also denoted a class of similar if not identical individuals, evolving in ceaseless interaction with one another, and through the unique gift of speech able to pool their experiences and so give birth to a higher order of being entirely: a racial memory, a collective mind [emphasis added], the emergent intelligence of an emergent racial being (Wagar, 104).

According to Wells’ Weltanschauung, the ecumenical singularity into which humanity was being compressed by evolution would relegate the individual to obsolescence:

As Wells grew older, he tended to look at life more and more from the synthetic level of racial being and less and less from the analytical level of the individual. At the end of his spiritual pilgrimage he virtually accepted the realist argument that the whole is real and the individual an illusion (Wagar, 104).

William Sims Bainbridge may prove to be instrumental in the demise of the individual. In an article entitled “US report foretells of brave new world,” journalist Nathan Cochrane examines Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance, a report edited and contributed to by Bainbridge:

A draft government report says we will alter human evolution [emphasis added] within 20 years by combining what we know of nanotechnology, biotechnology, IT and cognitive sciences. The 405-page report sponsored by the US National Science Foundation and Commerce Department, Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance, calls for a broad-based research program to improve human performance leading to telepathy, machine-to-human communication, amplified personal sensory devices and enhanced intellectual capacity (Cochrane, 1).

Elaborating on this research program, Cochrane explains how this convergent-technologies plan would be instrumental in the unification of mass consciousness:

People may download their consciousnesses into computers or other bodies even on the other side of the solar system, or participate in a giant “hive mind”, a network of intelligences connected through ultra-fast communications networks. “With knowledge no longer encapsulated in individuals, the distinction between individuals and the entirety of humanity would blur,” the report says. “Think Vulcan mind-meld. We would perhaps become more of a hive mind – an enormous, single, intelligent entity” (Cochrane, 1).

Of course, preparations must be made for the humanity’s comfortable acclimation to this new “hive mind.” Cochrane writes:

The report says the abilities are within our grasp but will require an intense public-relations effort to “prepare key organisations and societal activities for the changes made possible by converging technologies”, and to counter concern over “ethical, legal and moral” issues. Education should be overhauled down to the primary-school level to bridge curriculum gaps between disparate subject areas (Cochrane, 1).

The “endpoint of techne” may be drawing nigh as the Technocracy constructs its global holodeck.

References

• Bainbridge, William Sims, “Religions for a Galactic Civilization,” excerpted from Science Fiction and Space Futures, edited by Eugene M. Emme. San Diego: American Astronautical Society, pages 187-201, 1982.
• Bainbridge, William Sims, “New Religions, Science, and Secularization,” excerpted from Religion and the Social Order, 1993, Volume 3A, pages 277-292, 1993.
• Bainbridge, William Sims, “Memorials,” excerpted from Social Sciences for a Digital World, edited by Marc Renaud. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, 2000.
• Cochrane, Nathan, “US report foretells of brave new world,” July 23, 2002.
• Hoffman, Michael, Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare, Independent History & Research, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, 2001.
• Hubbard, L. Ron, Dianetics, Bridge Publications Inc., 1986.
• Keith, Jim, Mind Control, World Control, Adventures Unlimited Press, Kempton, Illinois, 1997.
• LaRouche, Lyndon, “The Pagan Worship of Isaac Newton,” Executive Intelligence Review, November 21, 2003.
• Pesce, Mark, “Ontos and Techne,” Computer-Medicated Magazine, April 1997.
• Raschke, Carl A., Painted Black, Harper Collins Publishers, New York, 1990.
• Russell, Bertrand, Religion and Society, Oxford University Press, London, 1947.
• Wagar, W. Warren, H.G. Wells and the World State, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1961.
• Wilmshurst, W.L., The Meaning of Masonry, Gramercy Books, New York 1980.

---

About the AuthorPhillip D. Collins acted as the editor for The Hidden Face of Terrorism. He has also written articles for Paranoia Magazine, MKzine, News With Views, B.I.P.E.D.: The Official Website of Darwinian Dissent and Conspiracy Archive. He has an Associate of Arts and Science. Currently, he is studying for a bachelor’s degree in Communications at Wright State University. During the course of his seven-year college career, Phillip has studied philosophy, religion, and classic literature. He also co-authored the book, The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship: An Examination of Epistemic Autocracy, From the 19th to the 21st Century, which is available online here.