How Engineering the Human Body Could Combat Climate Change

Now that they've been discussing climate engineering and geoengineering, we can now see that they've also been discussing engineering humans all in the name of saving the planet.

How Engineering the Human Body Could Combat Climate Change

www.theatlantic.com...

Some of the proposed modifications are simple and noninvasive. For instance, many people wish to give up meat for ecological reasons, but lack the willpower to do so on their own. The paper suggests that such individuals could take a pill that would trigger mild nausea upon the ingestion of meat, which would then lead to a lasting aversion to meat-eating. Other techniques are bound to be more controversial. For instance, the paper suggests that parents could make use of genetic engineering or hormone therapy in order to birth smaller, less resource-intensive children.

So, not only are they going to be dimming the Earth with manufactured clouds, they are going to be encouraging us to take pills to ward off global warming.

When will the insanity end? Not to mention, when will all the naysaying ostriches get their heads out of the sand? These people are serious, folks. Please wake up!

With respect to geoengineering, the worry is that it's just too risky---many of the technologies involved have never been attempted on such a large scale, and so you have to worry that by implementing these techniques we could endanger ourselves or future generations. For example it's been suggested that we could alter the reflectivity of the atmosphere using sulfate aerosol so as to turn away a portion of the sun's heat, but it could be that doing so would destroy the ozone layer, which would obviously be problematic. Others have argued that we ought to fertilize the ocean with iron, because doing so might encourage a massive bloom of carbon-sucking plankton. But doing so could potentially render the ocean inhospitable to fish, which would obviously also be quite problematic.

If you keep up with the topic of geo-engineering, you've noticed that some scientists are staunchly against geoengineering and believe it's too risky, then there's the others who believe that it should be conducted because the disease is worse than the cure. Now, big pharma is getting into the action by pushing their pills in the name of combating global warming. How much more ridiculous can they get?
Maybe if they replaced us with robots, we won't be releasing so much waste into the environment.

At least with the geoengineering technologies, they can be stopped right away (supposedly). What happens with these pills? Are they going to be safe to stop cold turkey or will people have to be weaned off of them slowly? What will the side effects of these pills? I must wonder how long they've been working on such meds and how much money has been invested in their development and testing.

To me, this sounds way too risky and not worth the end results. It should come as no surprise that it's actually all about the money and it's becoming painfully obvious at this point.

I wonder what their motto will be?
Save the planet -- pop a pill!

I dont see the problem in accelerating evolution of our species a bit to counter too rapidly changing climates or environment.

We will adapt naturally through genetic mutation and the weak will die off and remove the bunk dna from the gene pool.

To be honest i think that we have messed more with our evolution already by controlling our environment anyway enabling weak genes to survive even though in the wild they would die off. I cant see how accelerating our natural ability to adapt would make anything worse, we arnt talking about rolling about in toxic waste or anything.

reply to post by Biigs


I'm sorry to hear that you don't see this meddling as a bad thing.

Sure, creatures will adapt to their environment, but I do have a problem when these changes are artificially stimulated.

Thanks for your input.

Thinking about this more, maybe those who believe in global warming should have one lung removed so that they would be releasing half the amount of carbon dioxide into the environment. Or, TPTB could make gassy foods illegal. Or, they could force everyone to take Beano daily.

Originally posted by Afterthought
Thinking about this more, maybe those who believe in global warming should have one lung removed so that they would be releasing half the amount of carbon dioxide into the environment.

I dont think its going to work like that, if you remove a lung you are simply making the remaining one work harder to exchange the same co2 for fresh o2.

The way to reduce a humans co2 is to make them do less exercise, therefore needing less oxygen therefore expelling less co2

Global warming might be a real thing, but its actually just a hype word for climate change really. Its not more complicated, yes humans could increase or decrease the effect, but we are at the suns mercy and if it wants to throw a fit, we will all know about it!

The real problem with both geo-engineering and human engineering is that in neither case do we understand the systems we are dealing with.

We know enough about the climate to be capable of predicting precipitation to about 90% accuracy within 2-3 days, perhaps 50% accuracy within 7 days, but we don't know enough to even hazard a guess as to the next month's weather. Any meteorologist will admit freely that there are simply things about the atmosphere we do not yet fully understand. Even East Anglea and the IPCC admit that there are too many unknown variables to be able to accurately make long-term predictions.

We know enough about the human body to be able to ease pain and extend our natural lives to a degree. But no brain surgeon will be brash enough to say we know all about the brain. We can't even cure the common cold!

As soon as weather forecasters can accurately predict (99+% certainty) the weather for the next six months, as soon as doctors can announce they can stop the aging process and prevent death indefinitely, then I will begin considering the possible 'benefits' of geo-engineering and human engineering. Until that date, these wanna-be 'scientists' who feel the need to tamper with things on a massive scale they do not understand need to be locked inside a lab and fed through an opening in the door so they can't hurt any of us who have to live on this planet.

The media needs to stop listening to them as well. What they are preaching is reckless insanity, not science.

TheRedneck

This article from 2009 sounds as if they have been thinking about manipulating the human body in the name of climate change.
This paragraph seems to end on an ominous note (emphasis mine):
www.newscientist.com...

The document states that "deliberately manipulating physical, chemical, or biological aspects of the Earth system" should be explored alongside the more conventional approaches to climate change. Conventional approaches means reducing emissions – "mitigation" in policy-speak – and adjusting to the unavoidable effect of climate change – known as "adaptation".

As far as I'm aware, all life forms are directly connected to the "Earth system", so were they contemplating engineering the human body as far back as 2009? Was human engineering research also given the green light along with geoengineering?

So many questions...

reply to post by TheRedneck

reckless insanity

I second that.

It's really getting frightening the way they seem to think that this is going to be more helpful than harmful. Is nothing sacred to them? It's becoming painfully clear that the world is being run by psychopaths who want to be gods.

reply to post by Biigs

I dont think its going to work like that, if you remove a lung you are simply making the remaining one work harder to exchange the same co2 for fresh o2.

I hope you realize I was being sarcastic -- sort of. I was just implying that "they" should start manipulating their own bodies first and was offering "them" some suggestions.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Biigs

 

I dont think its going to work like that, if you remove a lung you are simply making the remaining one work harder to exchange the same co2 for fresh o2.

I hope you realize I was being sarcastic -- sort of. I was just implying that "they" should start manipulating their own bodies first and was offering "them" some suggestions.

Yeah, i got the sarcasm

Do you thin that humans the way we are right now is the last and final step in our evolution, like perhaps the shark or crustaceans?

We have engineered our environment so much that we have little left for our biological evolution to actually change further.

I was just proposing the counter argument for messing with our own dna directly might actually be where environmental changes stop and self mutation starts - perhaps in the big picture we might need to do this to be able to leave our planet for other planets, or to cope with near extinction disasters.

Would it not be a good thing, if we could reduce our body's oxygen needs through direct genetic manipulation, should we be forced to live underground, for example?

reply to post by Biigs

Do you thin that humans the way we are right now is the last and final step in our evolution, like perhaps the shark or crustaceans?

Certainly not. I have read about the whole transhumanist agenda and who can't consider Cheney's heart when you hear this term?

Aside from the pharmaceuticals that they're pushing, we cannot discount the how the chemicals/toxins (radiation, fluoride, pesticides) within the environment are also causing humans to change, but not for the better. It seems as though we're seeing record numbers of babies being born with deformities and other mutations. Scary stuff.

Hang on a minute? I thought that the TPTB, NWO, 'THEM', whoever is supposed to be doing all this bad stuff is trying to reduce the Earth's population not make us more resilient to climate change right?

reply to post by seabhac-rua


I think they want us to believe that they have our best interests in mind.
In reality, it's just one huge mind screw and they do see us as useless eaters. Maybe they know that only the fittest (as well as their own kind) can withstand all their manipulations. Culling the weakest. What doesn't kill you will make you stronger. I'm just wondering how many individuals can live through their bodies, minds, and environment being manipulated so quickly all at the same time? Seems like a lethal combination to me.

reply to post by Afterthought


This is more insanity... but I doubt this will go very far.

My real concern in all this is kurzweil's singularity

Kurzweil is doing everything in his power to make sure he's ready for the big event, which he calls the Singularity. He takes 150 pills a day, keeps himself in shape and looks forward to the day when he can start re-engineering his own body for immortality. And he's not alone. Kurzweil has been spreading the word about the Singularity in a series of books and two documentaries ("The Singularity Is Near" and "Transcendent Man") as well as academic programs at Singularity University in California's Silicon Valley.

Kurzweil projects that computers will match human brain power by around the year 2030, opening the way for a rapid merging of electronic and biological intelligence. Around the year 2045, that merger will lead to a worldwide transformation so dramatic that its follow-on effects would be hard to predict. (Hence the term "singularity.")

Transhumanism, also known as h3 is being weaved into pop culture so people accept it. the "elites" are the ones who will have the money to do this, it will ultimately lead to a tiered society with those with money have the ability to be practically immortal (according to kurzweil) and then lower races without these augmentations.

I like nothing about it. You can see how they are weaving this through groups like BEP:

and in video games:

they are projecting thier will on society that this comes true. we need to project our will that it does not!

when they genetically modify man
so that all digestive sourced methane will henceforth be expelled through the nose

farting will stop

and the climate will continue to change as it will according the immortal laws of the universe

reply to post by pianopraze


Thanks for elaborating on transhumanism.
Thanks again for bringing up it's H3 symbol. Many people don't realize how indepth this all is, so all we can do is shed a bit more light on the subject to open some more sleepy eyes.
H is the 8th letter of the alphabet.
8 is also the symbol for infinity.
88 is symbolic of double strand DNA.
888 is the symbol for infinite life everlasting -- the triple helix or modified DNA. When people see the H3 symbol, they should be aware that this is an avenue that is centered upon body and/or mind manipulation in order to promote transhumanism. No matter how H3, or HHH, is utilized, it stands for a rebuilding of the body and/or mind on some level. Even looking at 'HHH' you can see building blocks or bricks. Many entities that use this symbol are most concerned with breaking down a person and rebuilding them as they see fit.

I'm in agreement with you that requesting people to take pills to ward off global warming will not take hold. But, just as we're seeing with geoengineering, they have so many different types of manipulation at their disposal. If one method is shunned, they'll move to plan B.

Searching for more info related to engineering the human body, I came across this site.
www.sciencefair-projects.org...


One of the projects in the list is titled Cloning and Genetic Engineering.
www.sciencefair-projects.org...

The purpose of this project is to do a survey research project on what students know and feel about cloning and generic engineering. Our hypothesis states that the majority of students will that think cloning humans is a good idea.

Sounds like an experiment in predictive programming and positive suggestion.
In conclusion:
youth.net...

Our summary and conclusion states that out of all the students
we surveyed, 84% thought that we should definitely not clone
humans. The students thought it was a good idea to clone
animals in order to provide higher and more plentiful food,
medicine, and donor organs for human transplants. Therefore, we
reject our hypothesis which stated that the majority of the
students would think that cloning humans is a good idea. A
majority of 59% of the responses to the factual questions on our
questionnaire were incorrect which indicates that students don't
know a great deal about cloning and genetic engineering.

Then, we have a project titled Students and Global Warming.
www.sciencefair-projects.org...

The purpose of this project is to find out about global warming because it is an important global issue and we care about our planet. Our hypothesis states that the majority of the factual questions on our global warming questionnaire will be answered correctly.

Project results:
youth.net...

A majority of 77% of the students surveyed didn't know that
global warming is an increase of temperature due to the burning
of fossil fuels. A majority of 68% didn't know that global
warming is the same thing as the greenhouse effect. A majority
of 96% didn't know that the last international conference on
global warming was in Japan. A majority of 91% knew that the
agreement at the last conference on global warming was to cut
the percent of greenhouse gases produced in each country. A
small majority of 52% didn't believe that global warming was one
of the most important issues to deal with. A majority 82%
didn't know that the main cause of global warming is the burning
of fossil fuels and deforestation. A majority of 57% didn't
know that the results of global warming are a rise in sea level,
altered climates throughout the world, the melting of polar
caps, and global flooding of low level coastal levels. A
majority of 95% didn't know that the amount of carbon dioxide
increases in the atmosphere .4 percent per year. A majority of
71% didn't know that global temperature started rising in 1860.
A majority of 82% knew that Global Warming and the depletion of
the ozone layer are related.

Now, we have one titled Students and Overpopulation.
www.sciencefair-projects.org...

The purpose of this project is to do a survey research project on what students know and feel about global over population. My hypothesis states that the majority of the factual questions will be answered correctly.

In conclusion:
youth.net...

Only thirty-three percent of the factual questions were answered
correctly. Therefore, I reject my hypothesis that states that
the majority of the factual questions will be answered
correctly. Students think that global over-population is an
important problem, but do not know a great deal about it.

My conclusion is that these projects are showing how little young people understand and can be influenced because they have not been informed. I think "they" like a clean slate to work with to promote their agenda. They are also aware that the mind of a child can be manipulated and swayed quite easily.

I like meat!!

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Unless you're filthy rich, I don't think you'll be eating much (real) meat.
Sorry.

reply to post by Afterthought


Several years ago there was a media push on how people were going to turn blue. Psychics came out of the shadows to predict this event. It was the strangest thing. It was almost like something in the air - whether climate change or evolution or the Age of Aquarius - was going to bring this about. The Indigo children thing was going strong at the time. The other thing that had been building was the use of colloidal silver.

colloidal silver solution: definition

colloidal silver solution – A solution containing pure water and nanometer sized silver particles in a colloidal suspension...The particles remain suspended in the water owing to a particle charge which causes an electrostatic mutual repulsion of the particles.

Kids seemed to know what colloidal silver was and seemed to be willing to use it for whatever. The turning blue part was kept separate from colloidal silver in the media so that no connection could be immediately made but there is a connection.

Another person turns blue from colloidal silver

The only thing the hucksters don't claim colloidal silver can treat is argyria, an irreversible blue-gray skin condition caused by the ingestion of silver. That's because colloidal silver causes it.

In 1953, when she was 11 years old, her doctor prescribed colloidal silver nose drops for her colds. At the age of 14, a pharmacist looked at her one day and said, Why are you that color?

Another thing that had been happening was that cloud seeding had taken on new life. It was admitted that nano size particles were being used and silver iodide, a toxic substance, remained a fave.

Is Cloud Seeding Harmful?

Mild toxicity can cause GI irritation, renal and pulmonary lesions, and mild argyria (blue or black discoloration of the skin). Severe toxicity can result in hemorrhagic gastroenteritis, shock, enlarged heart, severe argyria, and death by respiratory depression

So the geoengineering of human beings is already taking place as a side effect of geoengineering itself. I know I don't remember being asked whether or not I wanted to turn blue.