Monthly Archives: November 2016


Here AI technology to eventually streamline the type of genocide and ethnic cleansing carried out by Planned Parenthood experts warn

A who’s-who grouping of the world’s most prominent minds has signed onto a letter urging robotics researchers to be extremely cautious in developing artificial intelligence (AI) technology, warning that an inevitable military AI arms race could (and likely will) unfold, leading to “a third revolution in warfare.”

Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, Tesla’s Elon Musk, scientist Stephen Hawking and more than 1,000 others, presenting at the recent International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Argentina, obviously see the writing on the wall: If AI technologies continue to develop unabated, they say, autonomous weapons systems that operate without human input will eventually commit atrocities like mass genocide and ethnic cleansing campaigns.

“Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology has reached a point where the deployment of such systems is — practically if not legally — feasible within years, not decades, and the stakes are high: autonomous weapons have been described as the third revolution in warfare, after gunpowder and nuclear arms,” their letter reads.

“It will only be a matter of time until they appear on the black market and in the hands of terrorists, dictators wishing to better control their populace, warlords wishing to perpetrate ethnic cleansing, etc. Autonomous weapons are ideal for tasks such as assassinations, destabilizing nations, subduing populations and selectively killing a particular ethnic group.”

Will AI robots help or hurt humans?

AI robot technology is already being used to perform unskilled labor and other mundane tasks that humans would rather not have to do themselves. Automated pesticide drones have now received Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approval for use in the spraying of genetically-modified (GM) and other chemical-reliant food crops, for instance.

Experiments have also been conducted on AI robots capable of planting, watering, and caring for plants without human intervention. This segment of AI development claims to be working “for” humanity rather than “against” it.

But AI as a whole remains an existential threat to human subsistence, these men and their colleagues warn. The endpoint of where AI technology is headed looks grim, at least on its current trajectory. The unmitigated endeavors of AI programmers and visionaries must be reigned in to prevent the full-scale annihilation of human civilization.

Will AI robots be used to perform ‘less crunchy’ partial-birth abortions for Planned Parenthood?

The first signs of this impending “robot apocalypse” were seen earlier this year at a Volkswagen assembly plant in Germany, where a “smart” robot with AI-like abilities grabbed a factory worker, threw him up against a wall, and inflicted such severe injuries that the man later died at the hospital.

If a process like auto assembly can be successfully performed by advanced AI robots (along with the occasional human killing), there’s no telling what else these machines could be programmed to “learn” how to do. The recent Planned Parenthood scandal is a perfect example of how AI robots might be used in the future to perform “less crunchy” partial-birth abortions in order to maximize the profits made from illegally selling aborted baby body parts and even whole, fully-intact dead babies to biotech companies.

IBM appears to be leading the way in this field with the development of complex AI software that the company says will one day have the capacity to identify diseases like cancer and heart disease without human input. The machinery would be tasked with “studying” hordes of medical data in order to interpret digital medical images and make automated diagnoses of patients.


Info New GMO gene drive technology could be used to unleash the world most devastating biological weapon

The next generation of genetically engineered life will more than likely possess a novel trait known as “gene drive” that literally spreads gene alterations like a virus within the host population, whether it is a plant or an animal. Many scientists are starting to worry that if it is placed into the wrong hands, the self-replicating technology could eventually turn GMOs (genetically-modified organisms) into covert bio-weapons for destroying food crops, livestock and even humans.

Gene drive is the scientific community’s latest attempt to domesticate Mother Nature and eliminate undesirable issues such as mosquito-borne illnesses — or at least that’s what we’re being told. The Independent (U.K.) says that gene drive technology has the potential to “address global problems in health,” but it also warns that gene drive has the potential to worsen global problems in health, not to mention contaminate the entire food chain with irreversible GM traits.

In a letter in the peer-reviewed journal Science, a cohort of 27 leading geneticists has urged the scientific community to take a step back and consider the ways in which gene drive technology poses serious risks to human health and the environment. In essence, the technology gives genetic butchers the ability to ignite a chain reaction of genetic changes that can’t be stopped, effectively transforming an entire population of life within just a few generations.

“Just as gene drives can make mosquitos unfit for hosting and spreading the malaria parasite, they could conceivably be designed with gene drives carrying cargo for delivering lethal bacterial toxins to humans,” warns David Gurwitz, a geneticist from Tel Aviv University in Israel.

Gene drive technology artificially speeds up the spread rate of GM traits

Under normal circumstances, altered genes only have about a 50 percent chance of being passed on to future generations. A visual diagram published by The Independent illustrates this, showing how even over the course of several generations of exposure, genetically altered mosquitoes only pass their traits on to a small percentage of their offspring, preserving wild-type features within its population to some degree.

Gene-drive inheritance, on the other hand, is an entirely different animal. Gene-drive alterations are artificially sped up to promote more rapid changes within a population, so they infect many more organisms at a much faster rate. Gene-drive inheritance also spreads GM traits much more quickly within a single organism, resulting in a nearly total transformation within just a few subsequent generations, as illustrated in the following diagram from The Independent:

“The additional genetic elements of Crispr (a type of gene drive technology) cause a chain reaction where the mutation is passed between chromosomes in the same organism, causing up to 97 per cent inheritance in resulting offspring-generations,” explains The Independent about gene-drive inheritance.

CRISPR gene-editing technique can be done for just $30, Nature paper admits

CRISPR, as explained in a recent feature article published in Nature, is a “cheap, quick, and easy to use” gene editing method that involves the delivery of an enzyme known as Cas9 into the target DNA of a given organism. Once there, this enzyme proceeds to edit the DNA to either disrupt target genes or insert desired consequences into them, a process that costs as little as $30.

The paper refers to the technology in terms of it being “democratized,” meaning it’s available to nearly everyone who wants it and knows what to do with it. Experts warn that this is one of the primary reasons it is considered immensely dangerous.

“The two applications of CRISPR technology that I’m the most worried about are edits to human reproductive tissue and the generation of and release into the wild of transgenic organisms that are capable of propagating edits,” writes Brian Farley, a molecular biologist from the University of California, Berkeley, in response to a Quora question about the dangers or threats of CRISPR technology.

“If we generate successfully edited sperm or eggs and then use them for in vitro fertilization, we’ll create individuals that carry those edits in every single cell of their bodies.”


News AI researchers back Elon Musk’s fears of technology causing human extinction

When big time entrepreneur Elon Musk headed to the podium at the MIT symposium at a recent meeting on technology, he turned heads as he spoke openly about the threat of artificial intelligence potentially causing human extinction.

“I think we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. If I were to guess at what our biggest existential threat is, it’s probably that,” said Elon Musk, CEO of electric car maker Tesla Motors. “With artificial intelligence, we are summoning the demon. In all those stories with the guy with the pentagram and the holy water, and he’s sure he can control the demon. It doesn’t work out.”

Elon Musk is known for the Tesla Motor’s dual-motor Model S sedan, which features a revolutionary autopilot feature, allowing the vehicle to steer itself between lanes. He is also the CEO and co-founder of SpaceX , a company that is now striving to build communities on Mars.

Can AI gain consciousness and evil intent?

It turns out that Elon Musk’s doomsday fears are quite plausible and potentially realistic. In fact, prominent AI researchers are coming out, backing Musk’s concerns.

“At first I was surprised and then I thought, ‘this is not completely crazy,'” said Andrew Moore, a computer scientist at Carnegie Mellon University. “I actually do think this is a valid concern and it’s really an interesting one. It’s a remote, far future danger but sometime we’re going to have to think about it. If we’re at all close to building these super-intelligent, powerful machines, we should absolutely stop and figure out what we’re doing.”

Moore and Musk agree — the increasing technology of artificial intelligence should be met with regulatory oversight at both the national and international level. In early August, Musk made his concerns public, saying that AI is “potentially more dangerous than nukes.”

Could AI robots defy humans and ultimately turn on them? Could they adapt to their masters, overcome their instruction, and become hostile? Do the autopilot features founded within his own automobile company pose a future threat to humans?

How long before AI learns to reason on its own?

Sonia Chernova, the director of the Robot Autonomy and Interactive Learning lab in the Robotics Engineering Program at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, backs Musk’s concerns and says, “It’s important to understand that the average person doesn’t understand how prevalent AI is.” But Chernova highlights the importance of differentiating between the various levels of artificial intelligence. Chernova said that some AI research is harmless, like the artificial intelligence built into email to filter out spam. Phone applications that make recommendations for movie and restaurant preference to users are essentially harmless AI. Google also uses AI for its Maps service.

She said many AI technologies pose no risk: “I think [Musk’s] comments were very broad and I really don’t agree there. His definition of AI is a little more than what we really have working. AI has been around since the 1950s. We’re now getting to the point where we can do image processing pretty well, but we’re so far away from making anything that can reason.”

Scientists agree that artificial intelligence crosses the line when it can reason, but Chernova says it could take 100 years or more for scientists to build an intelligent system like that.

Creating a system that keeps humans in control

Still, Musk said that he wants “to keep an eye” on AI researchers. That’s why he helped invest $40 million in Vicarious FPC, a company working on future AI algorithms.

Yaser Abu-Mostafa , professor of electrical engineering and computer science at the California Institute of Technology, agrees that AI is far from being able to reason intelligently, but it’s only a matter of time. He believes in creating systems that keep humans in control at all costs.

“Having a machine that is evil and takes over… that cannot possibly happen without us allowing it,” said Abu-Mostafa. “There are safeguards… If you go through the scenario of a machine that wants to take over or destroy the world, it’s a nice science-fiction scenario, as long as we don’t allow a system to control itself.”


Here When technology becomes religion and science becomes God

Are we in love with how smart we are? In America today, there are technology companies that have a much larger “cult following” than any religious organization. And there are millions upon millions of Americans that freely confess that they “believe in science”. So what does this say about us? Does it say that we have discarded ancient “superstitions” and instead have embraced logic and reason?

Sadly, in most cases the truth is that we have simply traded one form of religion for another. Scientists and technology gurus have become our new high priests, and most of us blindly follow whatever they tell us. But in the end, just like with so many religious organizations, it is all about the money. Those with the money determine what the science is going to say, who the high priests are going to be, and what messages are conveyed to the public. For example, once upon a time the big tobacco companies had armies of doctors and scientists that swore up and down that smoking cigarettes was not harmful. In fact, many doctors and dentists in America once personally endorsed specific brands of cigarettes. Of course millions of Americans were getting sick and dying, but this was dismissed as “anecdotal evidence”. And over in Germany, “science” was once used to prove that the Germans were the master race.

We look back in horror now, but at the time the best “science” in the world was used as justification to promote some horrible untruths. And of course the same thing is happening today. We are told over and over that “the science is settled” regarding genetically-modified food, climate change and vaccine safety, and yet those of us that think for ourselves know that isn’t the case at all. But if you do not believe in the “official story”, you don’t get to be part of the “scientific establishment”. By definition, the only people that get to be “scientific experts” are the ones that embrace the “doctrine” of those that control the big corporations, that fund the research studies at the major universities and that own the big media outlets. Everyone else is not permitted to be part of the discussion. (Story by Michael Snyder, republished from

As I have written about previously,[1] I spent eight years studying at public universities in the United States. And over time, I got to see where most “scientific truths” come from these days.

Most of the time, the theories that people believe are so “scientific” were simply pulled out of thin air. In other words, they were just the product of someone’s overactive imagination. In recent decades, there have been countless examples of “existing science” being overturned and rewritten when more information and evidence become available. This is because the “existing science” did not have any foundation to begin with.

And yet we continue to make the same mistake today. Instead of calling them “theories”, which is what they should do, scientists all over the world are so eager to make bold pronouncements about the wonderful new “discoveries” that they have made. These bold pronouncements are then repeated over and over and over again until they become “facts”. But of course they are not facts at all.

For instance, at one time it was a “scientific fact” that it was perfectly safe to smoke cigarettes. The following comes from a recent article by Tony Cartalucci…[2]

It wasn’t long ago when big-tobacco had armies of “scientists” citing the latest “studies” confirming the health benefits and safety of smoking. Of course these were paid liars, not scientists, even if many of them had PhDs. And it was lies they were telling, even if mixed with shades of science.