It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NSA Mind Control Technology and A.I. Revealed

page: 13
99
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by tetra50
reply to post by mandroids
 


If we do, it is a sad thing, as this topic is so very important. But trying to exchange ideas in this thread is something akin to a my feelings in the dentist's office. However, getting the information to people eclipses the discomfort personally....for me, anyway.
edit on 5-2-2012 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)


But I would like to point this out. Very often people reveal themselves and their motivations without intending to, at least, directly.
This person is asserting that genetics is mainly responsible for consciousness, and functional consciousness--i.e.,
behavior. This belief is shared by groups engaged in discriminatory and racist endeavors. If consciousness is based in genetics, primarily, then your behavior, mind set, choices will be determined by your race and your parents. This is exactly what the promoters and believers in this technology would assert, and would see the use of said technology as a way to "solve" or "cure" remotely, and without your assent or agreement, your genetic trait failings or lackings.....as you would be seen as capable of nothing more than what came before you and biologically determined who you would be, think and do. That someone thinks this is agreed upon by science I find quite disturbing, and exactly why we have come to a point where such technology exists.
Even if someone could claim to use a fMRI to "claim" to know what is in your mind, and a product of it, therein lies part of the danger. If you can claim to define what is going on in a mind, you can most likely put it there, to justify the claim, and your method for "fixing" it.
edit on 5-2-2012 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)

And whether you can put it there or not, one must realize how dangerous the mind set being put across in this one statement-- that consciousness is a result of genetics--really is. In itself, it seeks to be predictive of human beings. In other words, you can be defined without your input or participation. And the tools for defining "you,"
exist inherently separate from you--
edit on 5-2-2012 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)





I personally believe we are the victom of a dogmatic rant script. anyone presenting an opinion the OP didnt agree with was dealt with in very abrupt terms. my posts included.




posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
the fact is, incredibly, that you can agree with what he's saying, and you are still "dealt" with, as though there is only one truth, and belongs solely to OP's dissemination of it. The discussion of a horrific technology such as this, (and I've already made plain why), is very important to me---that the information gets out there and people are aware, that it is understood what is being done, why and how, and what it means for everyone, is extremely important to me. And I cannot believe I have come into a thread such as this and agreed with most of it, only to find myself under attack. It's incredible really. I guess what you can't do is add anything to what he is saying, because only his source and he could possibly be correct about anything.
But even more concerning to me, is that no one seems to understand what was revealed about the OP by the simple assertion, (incorrect), that conscioussness, the mind, are a product almost solely, if not solely of genetics.
This, in itself, is HUGE, and may very well reveal an intent of the OP in the subtext quite opposite of what the OP's seeming presented stance is.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by tetra50
 


Oh i mean no offense i wasen't implying that you your self was derailing anything i just didn't want this thread to turn out like that, it's some good reserach the OP put into it, also you being a victim your the people i'm fighting for and yes say hello to another victim that would be me.

Us both being victims have a vested issue in this and i'm sure you like i have done our very own research and tons of it i was just stating i think somerandomuser misunderstood some things that's all.
edit on 5-2-2012 by King Seesar because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   


Apparatus and method for remotely monitoring and altering brain waves

United States Patent Malech Patent Number: 03951134

Abstract

Apparatus for and method of sensing brain waves at a position remote from a subject whereby electromagnetic signals of different frequencies are simultaneously transmitted to the brain of the subject in which the signals interfere with one another to yield a waveform which is modulated by the subject's brain waves. The interference waveform which is representative of the brain wave activity is re-transmitted by the brain to a receiver where it is demodulated and amplified. The demodulated waveform is then displayed for visual viewing and routed to a computer for further processing and analysis. The demodulated waveform also can be used to produce a compensating signal which is transmitted back to the brain to effect a desired change in electrical activity therein.

Inventors: Malech; Robert G. (Plainview, NY)

Assignee: Dorne & Margolin Inc. (Bohemia, NY)

Appl. No.: 494518

Filed: August 5, 1974





NSA Signals Intelligence uses EMF Brain Stimulation for Remote Neural Monitoring (RNM) and Electronic Brain Link (EBL). EMF Brain Stimulation has been in development since the MKUltra program of the early 1950's, which included neurological research into "radiation" (non-ionizing EMF) and bioelectric research and development. The resulting secret technology is categorized at the National Security Archives as "Radiation Intelligence," defined as "information from unintentionally emanated electromagnetic waves in the environment, not including radioactivity or nuclear detonation."

Signals Intelligence implemented and kept this technology secret in the same manner as other electronic warfare programs of the U.S. government. The NSA monitors available information about this technology and withholds scientific research from the public. There are also international intelligence agency agreements to keep this technology secret.

The NSA has proprietary electronic equipment that analyzes electrical activity in humans from a distance. NSA computer- generated brain mapping can continuously monitor all the electrical activity in die brain continuously. The NSA records aid decodes individual brain maps (of hundreds of thousands of persons) for national security purposes. EMF Brain Stimulation is also secretly used by the military for Brain-to-computer link. (In military fighter aircraft, for example.)






This is partly for you, King Seesar. This is from a link I supplied earlier in the thread. Obviously, if I disagreed with Somerandsomer's info, I would not post such information, would I?
Now, as to OP's response, it was that Deepthought said this was more disinformation.
Respectfully, this has been going on, as King Seesar stated, since MK Ultra. Not only that, patents are not disinformation. This patent was granted. The tech exists.
If it did not exist, why would there have been laws passed about the use of such technology?
So, you see, I agree about the importance of the information. But it didn't just get here. And it has been built on since. The OP asserts that this is not yet ongoing, but will be soon, if someone doesn't stop it or get a handle on it. The patents speak for themselves, I believe. It is a bit late. Victims are many and have been around for quite some time. Many are diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenics.
edit on 5-2-2012 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by tetra50
 


Just the words NSA make me want to puke some times i don't know whos worse the corrupt no moral elements of the NSA CIA or FBI all extensions of the Military Industrial Complex, there is a reason Dwight Eisenhower warned people of them it's because he foresaw stuff like this happening.


And yes this has been going on for awhile now and there are many victims, and it is true many are diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, the first article the OP posted said that if a target found out they were being beamed with the weapon the tech could camouflage its self by having the target diagnosed with mental problems you are 100 percent correct.

edit on 5-2-2012 by King Seesar because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by King Seesar
 


I posted my last response, KS, before reading your last, sorry.
Yes, I agree with you it seems perhaps he misunderstood some things, as evidenced by my earlier posts in regards to "interface," his reply with facepalm there was no interface, and then later replying to another referencing said interface. OP then said he was saying there was no human to human interface possible as our brains operate on different frequencies. Exactly. I was never talking about human to human.
I then, though, explained that if you can have a computer to human interface, you can then provide interface between humans using the computer to brain interface. But he then asked what I was talking about.
Nuff said.
You and I, yes, both victims, both hold the proof of what victimizes, I think, very dear, every bit as dear as we hold our own mental thought processes and knowing what is not (our mental thought processes) and how it got there.
My assertion is this is ongoing and has been for quite some time. And if one has experienced it for any length of time, it is soul shattering, absolutely shattering. And no one should ever have to live through such a thing. Nor anyone attempting to define what is in their mind and/or a product of it.
Think of it: If as above in one of my references you can physiologically alter someone's DNA strand, then show it to be altered--just on a physiological level--and then purport to show what image is in their mind (which could be just an uploaded image from anywhere, induced even) but claims to be from a functional MRI, and these images can be strung together to convey something aberrant--combined with the assertion (false) that consciousness is a product of genetics--then predictive psychology and pre crime methods become more accepted. Then the tech gets deployed to "fix" you, instead of being seen as what is really the source of what appears to be broken.
See what I mean?
In our capitalistic society, it has become fairly commonplace to sell something that either does the breaking or is designed to break, in order to sell the next solution, and knowing how something works frequently provides the knowing for making it not work, to either provide the next financial reward for the repair, or to control anyone who you wish would shut up because they are hindering your controlling, politically bending, money making endeavors.
Survival of the fittest has become not only illuminating who is not fit, but perhaps making them appear to not be fit, and then make sure they don't survive. Social darwinism.
Yes, it's been going on for quite some time.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to King Seesar


Just the words NSA make me want to puke some times i don't know whos worse the corrupt no moral elements of the NSA CIA or FBI all extensions of the Military Industrial Complex, there is a reason Dwight Eisenhower warned people of them it's because he foresaw stuff like this happening.


And yes this has been going on for awhile now and there are many victims, and it is true many are diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, the first article the OP posted said that if a target found out they were being beamed with the weapon the tech could camouflage its self by having the target diagnosed with mental problems you are 100 percent correct.
edit on 5-2-2012 by King Seesar because: (no reason given)



The technology doesn't even do the diagnosing.....some well meaning, well intentioned psychiatrist would easily make that discernment based on his/her training, and the symptoms the target speaks of. It is the perfect weapon, as there is little ability to trace it, if any.
As to Eisenhower, there's a lot more to that story, but perhaps difficult to trace these days, since the fire in the old Eisenhower building where many records were lost in 2007-08--can't remember the exact date of that convenient fire, and never heard a cause suggested. Eisenhower, I believe, issued the warning because he had already sold us to the military industrial complex.
edit on 5-2-2012 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by tetra50
reply to post by King Seesar
 


I posted my last response, KS, before reading your last, sorry.
Yes, I agree with you it seems perhaps he misunderstood some things, as evidenced by my earlier posts in regards to "interface," his reply with facepalm there was no interface, and then later replying to another referencing said interface. OP then said he was saying there was no human to human interface possible as our brains operate on different frequencies. Exactly. I was never talking about human to human.
I then, though, explained that if you can have a computer to human interface, you can then provide interface between humans using the computer to brain interface. But he then asked what I was talking about.
Nuff said.
You and I, yes, both victims, both hold the proof of what victimizes, I think, very dear, every bit as dear as we hold our own mental thought processes and knowing what is not (our mental thought processes) and how it got there.
My assertion is this is ongoing and has been for quite some time. And if one has experienced it for any length of time, it is soul shattering, absolutely shattering. And no one should ever have to live through such a thing. Nor anyone attempting to define what is in their mind and/or a product of it.
Think of it: If as above in one of my references you can physiologically alter someone's DNA strand, then show it to be altered--just on a physiological level--and then purport to show what image is in their mind (which could be just an uploaded image from anywhere, induced even) but claims to be from a functional MRI, and these images can be strung together to convey something aberrant--combined with the assertion (false) that consciousness is a product of genetics--then predictive psychology and pre crime methods become more accepted. Then the tech gets deployed to "fix" you, instead of being seen as what is really the source of what appears to be broken.
See what I mean?
In our capitalistic society, it has become fairly commonplace to sell something that either does the breaking or is designed to break, in order to sell the next solution, and knowing how something works frequently provides the knowing for making it not work, to either provide the next financial reward for the repair, or to control anyone who you wish would shut up because they are hindering your controlling, politically bending, money making endeavors.
Survival of the fittest has become not only illuminating who is not fit, but perhaps making them appear to not be fit, and then make sure they don't survive. Social darwinism.
Yes, it's been going on for quite some time.



Yea it's been going on to long and everything you just said is 100 percent correct so well said that if i could i'd take your whole statement and make it my signature below my posts, everything you just said should be heard by everyone.


I think in the begining pre world war 2 there were honest and good intentions in terms of studying the human mind and maybe trying to help people legitimately with there blessing, but as soon as Franklin Roosevelt signed on to project paperclip and allowed the Nazi scientist's who were in fact war criminals into the country to basically continue Adolf Hitlers experimentation on human subjects is more then likely the point this avenue became corrupt.






edit on 5-2-2012 by King Seesar because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by tetra50
Quite a few people who responded to you in this thread agree completely with you that this tech exists, and agree absolutely about the horror of what it is used for and represents, and yet, you treat many as though they make no sense, when your responses to those who agree seem to make no sense. There is nothing above that doesn't make sense, as you assert.


That's because they were getting lost in the disinformation. To me, your comment didn't make sense, you were talking about fMRI, which has nothing to do with this technology.


Originally posted by tetra50
My remarks about consciousness are hardly "my beliefs." The debate that science, itself, has had about the functionality and what comprises and constitutes consciousness is historical, widespread and hardly non scientific. Behavioral psychology and other psychological specialties have long debated what consciousness is, and if it is a product of genetics, or environment....it's a cliche called nature vs. nurture.
As to the controlled hallucination that an interface with a computer can induce and that being "what we are discussing," it is what I have been discussing, too. And much of philosophy is about what defines consciousness. Even purely medical science has long debated what areas of the brain, and exactly what functions constitute and define consciousness. Genetics can hardly be the only determining factor of knowlege or awareness.....


If you subscribe to the functional view of genetics, then everything you experience in nurture must be absorbed by a neural network designed from genetics. Thus genetics determines what can be done, how you learn and everything the brain can do.

So, in the context of Remote Neural Communication and being able to see a controlled hallucination in the third person perspective, this must be a product of genetics.

Watch this documentary, it should give you an insight into this:





Originally posted by tetra50
Perhaps somehow this goes back to one of your first responses to me, that you know about the conservation of stupidity......LOL. I didn't take this personally at first, but it's beginning to seem that this is exactly how you meant it.


That comment was in relation to the creation of a technological singularity. The conservation of stupidity can be thought of as a law, in that, it takes a superintelligence to create one.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by tetra50
the fact is, incredibly, that you can agree with what he's saying, and you are still "dealt" with, as though there is only one truth, and belongs solely to OP's dissemination of it. The discussion of a horrific technology such as this, (and I've already made plain why), is very important to me---that the information gets out there and people are aware, that it is understood what is being done, why and how, and what it means for everyone, is extremely important to me. And I cannot believe I have come into a thread such as this and agreed with most of it, only to find myself under attack. It's incredible really. I guess what you can't do is add anything to what he is saying, because only his source and he could possibly be correct about anything.
But even more concerning to me, is that no one seems to understand what was revealed about the OP by the simple assertion, (incorrect), that conscioussness, the mind, are a product almost solely, if not solely of genetics.
This, in itself, is HUGE, and may very well reveal an intent of the OP in the subtext quite opposite of what the OP's seeming presented stance is.




when the OP shows me his phd, i will listen more.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by mandroids

when the OP shows me his phd, i will listen more.


How will that help you understand it?



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   


If you subscribe to the functional view of genetics, then everything you experience in nurture must be absorbed by a neural network designed from genetics. Thus genetics determines what can be done, how you learn and everything the brain can do.

So, in the context of Remote Neural Communication and being able to see a controlled hallucination in the third person perspective, this must be a product of genetics.

Watch this documentary, it should give you an insight into this:


Respectfully, much of what you label "disinformation," is patented, and then laws passed against it.
Respectfully, I am aware of the genetic functionality school of thought, but I have provided other, very scientific, physiologically based information that argues against that. Sorry, but I find the unfounded idea that we, and our consciousness, are solely informed by our genetics erroneous, based on science, and further, dangerous, in its over simplicity, even from a biological, as well as neurochemical standpoint.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by tetra50

Respectfully, much of what you label "disinformation," is patented, and then laws passed against it.
Respectfully, I am aware of the genetic functionality school of thought, but I have provided other, very scientific, physiologically based information that argues against that. Sorry, but I find the unfounded idea that we, and our consciousness, are solely informed by our genetics erroneous, based on science, and further, dangerous, in its over simplicity, even from a biological, as well as neurochemical standpoint.


We are the hardware upon which we run. That's science's viewpoint.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by tetra50

Actually, here, your beliefs are not established science. If they were, then we would long ago have begun to take the children of serial killers, psychopaths, sociopaths, etc. and anyone who was violent or displayed aberrant behavior and lock them up or attempt "treatment" before their behavior made it necessary, on just the assumption that such behavior would inevitably present as necessitated by "genetics" and DNA.

One of the last things used in defining consciousness and what constitutes it by ANYONE in science would be genetics. Am I speaking with a computer?


As I said, current science states we are the hardware on which we run. That is, the brain and genetics.

Another good documentary is this one:




posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Knowing your credentials would help me to accept the validity of what you say versus you being just another net know all. Which you appear to be.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by mandroids
Knowing your credentials would help me to accept the validity of what you say versus you being just another net know all. Which you appear to be.


So, it wouldn't help you understand the work for yourself?



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by somerandomuser
 


Again, I find that comment revealing as to your perspective. I find it unfortunate you let no other scientific information in. We are not in the least, really, comparable to hardware. Hardware involves no complex chemical interactions. Did you read the link and info I provided for you, all based on hard science, about genetics and cellular structure--oversimplification in my description. Your perspective of hardware is much less science based, using words you have bandied about with me. Your comment strips nature of its complexity and wonderment, in the complexities of its workings which g way, way beyond straightforward hardware. If you were correct in your encapsulation of the role genetics play, every great artist and musician would have had children that achieved the same. And human behavior and solving conflicts would be as simple as running an update on hardware and configuring the appropriate software. Consciousness and sentience in an AI would have happened years before now...... I believe you have closed yourself to so much information that you begin to contradict your own presented viewpoint, as often happens to those who assume they now know all.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   
with a phd i would be more inclined to accept what you say;you could be just anyone.as for what you say, a basic teaching cert may help you to make you to put your points across in a better way.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by somerandomuser
 


Current science? There is much current science that does not say that at all. Try reading some scientific neuroscience studies.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by mandroids
with a phd i would be more inclined to accept what you say;you could be just anyone.as for what you say, a basic teaching cert may help you to make you to put your points across in a better way.


What you are really saying is that you do not understand the evidence that has been presented.

I don't think you can add much to this discussion, other than distraction.



new topics

top topics



 
99
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join