Artificial Intelligence and the future of the human race

[TAG145]

True Earth, Better Way Conference.
Insightful speech by Laura Aboli

It is hard not to consider that all of this is a much, much larger plan for the human race. Who is the puppet master?


View: https://youtu.be/mIo0ITGvrXo?si=vmfDL_LQXDSffnSU

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

“It is hard to believe that the medical profession is that stupid to ignore its own mountain of evidence in favor of sunlight. I am inclined to think that something more sinister is at play here. The very ideas of "protection" and "unprotected exposure" are strongly reminiscent of the recommendations of the International AIDS Society or the American Sexual Health Association. Namely, absolutely no sexual contact (oral, vaginal, etc) without "protection", even among stable, monogamous couples. Whether one believes in conspiracies or not, the indisputable trend is that no human activity of any kind is encouraged without the proper recommendations or even license from the powers that be.”

Avoiding Sunlight May Be As Bad For Health As Smoking A Pack A Day

As most readers of this blog know, the current recommendations of the American Dermatology Association (ADA) call for pretty much no sun exposure of any skin areas unless those areas have been "protected" by sunscreen. The same recommendation applies to tanning beds and makes not distinction of...

raypeatforum.com

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

@zorba990 posted this elsewhere….

“
View: https://twitter.com/WallStreetApes/status/1726371173897027814


The Truth About Fluoride Being Revealed In Court The US Government Puts This Poison In Our Tap Water CDC Admits There Is NO DATA To Support Fluoride Claims. Fluoride’s Parent Compound Is Used In Almost All SSRI Antidepressants, Force Medicating The Population Into Complacency“CDC agrees with NRC that it is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain and the body by direct and indirect means. Yes, CDC in connection with the Intergovernmental Work Group. It's correct to say that CDC does not have any data to, any data on the tolerable upper fluoride intake for neurotoxic effects for infants.Yes. Okay. And you see how the definition also includes toddlers. So CDC does not have any data on the tolerable upper fluoride intake for neurotoxic effects on toddlers. That's true. Okay. There's been two studies now from the Dr. Who's birth cohort in Mexico City, and there's been two studies from the Canadian cohort that Dr. Lanfear has been working on. All four of these studies have found significant and large associations between early life fluoride and adverse neurodevelopmental effects.”

Even if it worked, the dose is not controlled. And there is no chance to opt out from tap water fluoride that might be being inhaled in the shower. I am unsure how it will ever be stopped -- things like this seem to keep going on regardless of what the public wants.”

TOOTHPASTE: FLUORIDATED OR NOT (POLL)

for the common masses the most basic things is what they first and foremost should focus on: · Tongue in the roof of the mouth. · Teeth in light contact. · Lips sealed. · Breath through the nose. · Swallow correctly by pushing upwards against the roof of...

raypeatforum.com

 

[Layne]

It is hard not to consider that all of this is a much, much larger plan for the human race. Who is the puppet master?

Quite honestly, I have no idea what she's trying to convey. It all sounds pretty weird.

 

[TAG145]

Quite honestly, I have no idea what she's trying to convey. It all sounds pretty weird.

It is in your right to think it sounds pretty weird. There are too many things converging all at once right now for me to think it is just by coincidence.

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

It is in your right to think it sounds pretty weird. There are too many things converging all at once right now for me to think it is just by coincidence.

I’m with you that something has changed in the world, and it wasn’t by accident, and @Layne is right, in that it sounds pretty weird. In all of my sixty years I could never have imagined this past three years.

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

This was posted by @haidut elsewhere…

“All of these things are fundamentally incompatible with "technocracy" - the idea that human society and each individual need to be precisely engineered and controlled. As long as we are led by technocrats, all of those things will be under attack. It is not a coincidence that it was technocrats who came up with the term "unprotected sex". There is something deeply patronizing and insulting about that term, sound almost like a "license", or at least social approval of some sort. What's next - how dare we eat "infectious food", because, you know, regular food is teeming with bacteria and can't possibly be OK for eating until properly sterilized, inspected, licensed, etc?”

The World Might Actually Run Out Of People

As many of my readers know, the mantra of overpopulation has been the driving force behind countless political initiatives, usually related to draconian austerity. You see, according to most of the imbeciles we have put in office all over the world's governments, the world's population is...

raypeatforum.com

 

[Layne]

There are too many things converging all at once right now for me to think it is just by coincidence.

If she would carefully and meticulously describe the many things she believes and apparently believes are converging at this time, I would be more than happy to consider her proposition(s). But she seems to want to use various kinds of catch pharases without telling us what they mean, but are implied to have some very nefarious undertones. It seems to be all about generating emotions, and little to do with logical, coherent thinking.

But hey, I guess that's just me. I'm really a cut to the chase kind of guy. I don't like it when people use "cute" or "catchy" evasions with their narratives. Interestingly, I hold out the possibility she may indeed have something I would be interested in hearing more about. She just doesn't seem to want to take the time to lay out a coherent narrative. I guess that would involve being willing to dispense with words that are intended to elicit emotional and conspiratorial responses.

I distrust "charismatic" kind of rhetoric. I prefer the "calm" of cause and effect types of discussion. It's hard to find that since it's the highly charged, emotional, passionate, and conspiratorial headlines that catch people's attention.

 

[Mossy]

If she would carefully and meticulously describe the many things she believes and apparently believes are converging at this time, I would be more than happy to consider her proposition(s). But she seems to want to use various kinds of catch pharases without telling us what they mean, but are implied to have some very nefarious undertones. It seems to be all about generating emotions, and little to do with logical, coherent thinking.

But hey, I guess that's just me. I'm really a cut to the chase kind of guy. I don't like it when people use "cute" or "catchy" evasions with their narratives. Interestingly, I hold out the possibility she may indeed have something I would be interested in hearing more about. She just doesn't seem to want to take the time to lay out a coherent narrative. I guess that would involve being willing to dispense with words that are intended to elicit emotional and conspiratorial responses.

I distrust "charismatic" kind of rhetoric. I prefer the "calm" of cause and effect types of discussion. It's hard to find that since it's the highly charged, emotional, passionate, and conspiratorial headlines that catch people's attention.

In fairness, I agree that the emotional background music could be done away with; and in this video the speech is presented out of context. But apart from that, she was about as calm as could be, and straight forward. And, this wasn't a discussion but a speech during a presentation.

Here is a more in-depth video which gives more context to this presentation:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCh6auCKYS0


And here is a transcript of the original video, which may convey its meaning better:

"The final goal is to eradicate humanity as we know it. Once you understand the final destination it becomes much easier to look back and identify the psychological conditioning, the biological tempering, the cultural grooming, and the educational prepping that we have been subjected to for decades, in preparation to making us accept a post-human future. It takes a lot of physical and psychological abuse to get an intelligent species like ours to agree to its own extinction. Most, if not all, that has transcended in the last 60 years was designed to get us closer to accepting such a dystopian reality. Whether you care to accept it or not, we live in a hyper controlled matrix where our perception of reality is meticulously planned , managed, and executed in order to control and steer us in whichever direction they wish, and the direction is a post-human world. For this they first needed to destabilize, dehumanize, and demoralize humanity through every means possible: the destruction of the nuclear family, children being indoctrinated by the state, abortion, the eradication of God and spirituality from education, life in mega cities and away from nature, toxic food, air, and water, social media replacing real human connection and interaction, engineered financial crisis and taxation, endless wars and massive migration, stress, anxiety, depression, drugs and alcohol, constant fear mongering, moral relativism as the new religion; and I could go on and on about how humanity has been influenced and forced to move away from all the things that give us strength, security, purpose, and meaning. A weak, immoral, disconnected, ignorant, and unhealthy population is an easy target for the next stage—the creation of an entire generation of androgynous beings. Masculinity is under attack psychologically, culturally, and biologically; women are being replaced in sports, entertainment, and politics by men pretending to be woman, and children are being indoctrinated at school to think that gender is a choice. The transgender movement is not a grass root movement, it comes from the top; it has nothing to do with people's freedom of expression, sexuality, or civil rights. It's an evil psyop with a clear agenda to get us closer to trans-humanism by making us question the most fundamental notion of human identity—our gender. If you don't know who you are, if you already identify as a hybrid between a man and a woman, you will be easily convinced to become a hybrid between human and machine. Gender ideology is the 2 + 2 = 5 from George Orwell's 1984 dystopian novel. It's the the final test to see whether we will follow the most absurd party line towards our own extinction. But 2 + 2 = 4; and no matter how you choose to dress, call yourself, or change your physique, will not change that. The sad reality, though, is that in the gaslighting process to get us closer to a posthuman future they have mentally and physically harmed an increasing number of children and young people, and it's only getting worse. This must be stopped."

— Laura Aboli “Transhumanism: The End Game”

 

[Layne]

The sad reality, though, is that in the gaslighting process to get us closer to a posthuman future they have mentally and physically harmed an increasing number of children and young people, and it's only getting worse. This must be stopped."

OK, I perused the above (again I guess). Nowhere does she seem to explain who "they" are. Are we just supposed to know who "they" are because it's some kind of "common knowledge"? Soooooo many gaps. When I see gaps like that, I wonder why they aren't filled in. So I presume there really is no way to fill them in. And what in the heck is a "posthuman" future???

 

[Mossy]

OK, I perused the above (again I guess). Nowhere does she seem to explain who "they" are. Are we just supposed to know who "they" are because it's some kind of "common knowledge"? Soooooo many gaps. When I see gaps like that, I wonder why they aren't filled in. So I presume there really is no way to fill them in. And what in the heck is a "posthuman" future???

I don't want to speak for her, and I haven't listened to that entire second video (maybe she mentions it there), but I could guess that the "they" are leaders of the globalist agenda—those who are implementing a progressive, one-world government. The transhumanism she talks about is that post-human element, where some of the key players of the globalists are working to create transhumans—man and machine, to use a classic saying about the idea. I don't know the exact workings of this, but its akin to combining a computer and a human: putting a microchip in a human, or something similar. I don't now the exact technical workings of this, but a key voice for this is Yuval Noah Harari. If you were to search his name you could probably find more information. Here is a quote from him:

"People could look back in 100 years and identify the coronavirus epidemic as the moment when a new regime of surveillance took over, especially surveillance under the skin which I think is maybe the most important development of the 21st Century, is this ability to hack human beings."

Biometric data would create a system that knew human beings better than they knew themselves, he added."

 

[Layne]

"... they first needed to destabilize, dehumanize, and demoralize humanity...abortion, men pretending to be woman, The transgender movement is not a grass root movement, it comes from the top... It's an evil psyop with a clear agenda to get us closer to trans-humanism by making u..s question the most fundamental notion of human identity—our gender.

Hi @Mossy -- Thanks for trying to provide some context for me. I narrowed down some of the words from her little speech, and think the above sums it up pretty good. She appears to be against women's reproductive and bodily autonomy rights, and the sexual orientation decisions of others. Saying it "comes from the top" and is "an evil agenda"??? Yeah, sure.

She strikes me as me being intolerant and self-righteous (who as a group seem to often border on being cruel) and trying to cloak her own short comings by trying to blame "them" for people wanting freedom of choice in their lives. I think what she has to say is a devious attempt at misdirection, or perhaps at best, nonsensical and preposterous propositions.

 

[Lizb]

Surely artificial intelligence is machine learning?

Do we have, will there ever be actual artificial intelligence? If so why would you want to create something you can't control?

ChatGPT by the way is plagerisum.

 

[Mossy]

Hi @Mossy -- Thanks for trying to provide some context for me. I narrowed down some of the words from her little speech, and think the above sums it up pretty good. She appears to be against women's reproductive and bodily autonomy rights, and the sexual orientation decisions of others. Saying it "comes from the top" and is "an evil agenda"??? Yeah, sure.

She strikes me as me being intolerant and self-righteous (who as a group seem to often border on being cruel) and trying to cloak her own short comings by trying to blame "them" for people wanting freedom of choice in their lives. I think what she has to say is a devious attempt at misdirection, or perhaps at best, nonsensical and preposterous propositions.

Hello. You're welcome.

I didn't catch that from her—all that you've mentioned—but I had only listened to that first out-of-contect video in full, not the second. There is so much information and stimuli coming at us, I have to limit and balance my time. So, for now, I'll have to let her be.

Once again, I don't want to speak for her, but I see her message about a real concern of a real threat—globalist rule from elite, non-elected rulers who hold to a very progressive agenda to be imposed on everyone, regardless of a nation's sovereign rights, laws, and freedoms.

 

[Mossy]

ChatGPT by the way is plagerisum.

This is what has stood out to me for a while now—that they can blatantly commit this and not bat an eye. That only tells me they are much more powerful and certain about what they can accomplish; or so they think they are. I would like to think the latter, but the last 3+ years has shown the former—so far.

 

[Layne]

There is so much information and stimuli coming at us, I have to limit and balance my time. So, for now, I'll have to let her be.

Hi @Mossy -- Wise decision to put limitations on all the information and stimuli coming at us. I believe it's imperative we do so!

One thing I do to limit myself is to look for things that expose some of the underlying beliefs of people who are trying to persuade us to think one way or the other. If their underlying beliefs expose intolerance towards others, especially those who are somehow "different", then that's an immediate tipoff for me to not waste my time and energy on their ramblings.

In the case of this woman, showing lack of respect for women who want the right to make their own reproductive and bodily autonomy decisions tells me all I need to know about about some of her underlying motives. As such, I'll also move on, and just let her be.

 

[Mossy]

Hi @Mossy -- Wise decision to put limitations on all the information and stimuli coming at us. I believe it's imperative we do so!

One thing I do to limit myself is to look for things that expose some of the underlying beliefs of people who are trying to persuade us to think one way or the other. If their underlying beliefs expose intolerance towards others, especially those who are somehow "different", then that's an immediate tipoff for me to not waste my time and energy on their ramblings.

In the case of this woman, showing lack of respect for women who want the right to make their own reproductive and bodily autonomy decisions tells me all I need to know about about some of her underlying motives. As such, I'll also move on, and just let her be.

Hello, I understand where you are coming from...to a point. Of course, it is near impossible for all of us think and believe the same, due to many personal and unique factors that make up our individual histories. Even so, the truth is important—very important. All of life, the good and bad, I feel has to do with what we do with truth; so, if someone feels they have truth, such as this women, I think it's natural that she feels inclined to share it. Some people are not too gracious and respectful in doing so—sharing what they believe to be true—I think she definitely was respectful. I understand if you don't agree with her; and I realize we all have our tolerance level of what we'll consider listening to that is beyond our own perspective.