Concepts around radical technological and energy transition
Where the 21st century begins and ends could be a quantum leap.
Consider a basic question of technological and energy development, set within seemingly bizarre concepts.
First, consider what the implications of radical technological advances in individual human capability and global energy generation might mean.
Knowledge technology
Imagine, per The Matrix, that it was possible to load the entirety of human knowledge into a human brain in such a way that that knowledge was accessible and usable to the individual.
The processes of learning and education would be turned inside out. It would take radically less time to learn anything and knowledge-based productivity could skyrocket. Manual applications of that knowledge would change as well, but exactly how would depend upon how the knowledge would manifest and the subject matter in question.
Take a cerebral subject, physics, and a physical subject, Ju Jitsu. Load them both into your brain. What might happen?
Regarding physics, there’s no direct physical expression of the cerebral subject. Physical manifestations of it are effectively manufactured when someone manages to come up with an idea for implementing their knowledge of the subject. For example, someone learned enough physics to then conceptualise a nuclear bomb then, by working with others, physically manifested the concept.
Regarding Ju Jitsu, you could know all the theory, all the moves and all the techniques, but you would still have to physically act them out. Whether physical or kinaesthetic skill would be inherent following the knowledge upload or not would be an open question. Would you still have to go through enough physical practise of the uploaded knowledge in order to become proficient, or would you, like Neo, become physically proficient following the upload?
What other factors would be involved in the ability to upload knowledge to the human brain/mind/being? Here’s a few I can think of:
The actual means by which knowledge is stored in humans, which includes the rate of transfer, storage capacity, recall capability and storage coherence (can a human effectively, meaningfully store huge amounts of knowledge in an effective way?).
What the mind, the brain and DNA actually are and how they all work together in a coherent way in the individual and the species as a whole over multiple generations.
These are big, heavy questions. This article does not aim to dwell on these topics to any great extent, but they are important for questions that will be presented later on.
Rate of transfer
Where and how is knowledge stored? Obvious convention would suggest that synaptic connections and the brain as a whole are the human hard drive and central processing unit. Therefore, very quickly uploading a large amount of data to the brain would have to force the creation of synapses and appropriately ordered synaptic connections. This could mean that there would be an inherent biological restriction on the upload rate that is set by the speed at which synapses and connections could be created. It may not be possible to “flash” a human brain.
A perhaps less obvious (to some) means of knowledge storage is in DNA. This isn’t new or unknown. DNA stores data biological and it is read and written by complex biological processes inside living humans. It is also dynamic over short, medium and long time frames. DNA clearly transfers properties to offspring. Humans have latent abilities across the species e.g. language, and also hand down physical, intellectual and even personality characteristics to offspring. Therefore, could it be possible to write knowledge into humans at the somatic level and also the germ level? A somatic write capability would affect the individual human. A germ write capability would pass to offspring.
Combine the mind/brain with DNA. What do we get? We get the short, medium and long term, possibly permanent and offspring-persistent upload, storage and transfer of knowledge through the species, if mind/brain and DNA storage can all be utilised.
How fast knowledge can be written into these places in ways that are coherent and usable is the question.
Storage capacity
How much information the brain can store is unknown, but theorised. One estimate puts it at between 1 and 2.5 petabytes of data, which is a lot. That’s plenty of the meaningful part of the internet or, better still, a comprehensive library (sans useless human noise e.g. social media junk and mindless comments and spam). This estimate is for the brain.
When it comes to DNA, some inherently complex questions immediately crop up. How much information can be stored in the human genome? Is this synonymous with how much storage space it takes to record an entire human genome? How much usable, variable space is available in the genome to store new information?
I don’t have the answers, but you see where I am going with this. If you can upload the appropriate information into the brain, quicker than traditional learning, and you can upload appropriate information into DNA, you’ve got potentially massive storage capability in a human.
Recall capability
Information or knowledge is useless if it cannot be recalled effectively. Human memory is imperfect and seemingly impermanent. Having a good memory is a partially learnable skill and is also impacted by injury or physical damage to at least the brain. But learning itself affects memory production and subsequent recall. Interest in a topic and the ability to contextualise concepts and embed them meaningfully all impact recall. People store and recall information in multiple and often different ways that are related to personal experience, emotion, sensory input etc. Standardising “upload learning” such that any human could acquire, via the act of upload, effective and permanent recall that preserved conceptual context might be an extremely complex problem.
Storage coherence
You might be able to upload a petabyte of knowledge into someone’s brain but if they cannot make sense of it, they would probably struggle to apply most of it effectively on an instantaneous basis. However, this raises another question.
What if, at the point at which a human reaches their maximum biological size (around 18 years old) you then uploaded all the information into their adult brain? Would they then have to basically spend time thinking about the information in order to make connections between the subjects, topics etc in order to make all that information personally coherent?
Mind, brain & DNA
Is an organism at birth the knowledge and capabilities and biological programming wrought from its DNA, then through life becomes this plus what it experiences and processes throughout its life via the brain and mind? If so, and it can finally write some of that life experience back into its germ cell DNA and pass that on to offspring, if one could jack both processes and upload information to both places on an accelerated basis, one would effectively boost or jack evolution on a knowledge and possibly physical skill basis.
My suspicions about accelerated human learning
I suspect that there are three open questions of bandwidth, contextualisation and metaphysics.
Bandwidth
Sensory overload and sensory deprivation suggest to me that there are upper and lower limits to human bandwidth. Overload leads to processing shutdown, be it sensory or cognitive. Deprivation or underload leads to multiple outcomes including hallucinations (whatever they actually are or represent) and mental and mood impacts.
In terms of rapidly uploading information to the human brain, a full sensory method would need to be employed that involves all the sensory pathways. Take physics. Conventional learning requires visual, auditory and physical input pathways to get information into the brain. At the same time, mental processing occurs to filter, sort, order, prioritise, contextualise and link that information. The end result, in conventional terms, appears to result in the formation of synapses and synaptic linkages. Each of these pathways probably has a maximum bandwidth and then the mental processing process probably has a maximum bandwidth as well.
If knowledge can be uploaded via a multi-sensory template, it could be bandwidth limited, before any requirement to physically practise or embed the information e.g. Ju Jitsu knowledge versus physical skill.
Contextualisation
I don’t just recall knowledge or information on an abstract basis. Why and how I learned it, and put it into practise is always a factor in recall that occurs at some point in my memory during recall and application, unless I’m performing and innate or developed motor skill. Language is probably the one seeming motor skill that I have that I can recall and employ abstractly without recall of how I came to be fluent in English. Other motor skills like driving or flying have progressed to a similar level, but all of them are subject to the adage of “use it or lose it”. While I might not stop being fluent in English, my ability to effectively communicate with another human is also dependent upon socialisation. People who don’t actively communicate to others lose proficiency in effectively communicating, regardless of linguistic fluency, because communication is more than language. Driving and flying are process skills that require memory and cognition, and so can degrade but for reasons that are different (and similar) to language.
How and why I came to know something and how it came to relate to other things I know i.e. knowledge context, is important. Arbitrarily uploading information in the absence of context may present a kind of limit to being able to use or make sense of that information or knowledge, further down the line.
For example, I might be able to upload Chinese. But if I don’t have externalised context to go with the language, how proficient a communicator in Chinese would I be following the upload? Would I still have to be immersed in Chinese culture and living context to be proficient in Chinese-based linguistic communication? If so, how could this be dealt with at the upload stage? What if the Chinese template carried not just the mechanics of the language but also a sufficient suite of context that a fully fluent Chinese communicator had developed by, say, 18? This would likely include emotion and by inference some form of false memories that conveyed that context.
Metaphysics
Current human experience tells us that in our plane of existence and at our current levels of common knowledge energy, matter, time and space are not fully understood. We know energy and matter are related but we clearly don’t understand either or the real fundamental, universal relationship between them. Time appears to be linear and irreversible in this plane of existence, but there is some evidence that it is not. Space is also not a fixed three dimensional plane, even though we experience it as such.
What if we discover (or some of us already know) that energy, matter, time and space are all, essentially, the same thing? A simple example of this is the concept of gravity-based travel, in which warping space through manipulation of gravity brings point A to the same place as point B, thereby making travel between the two a zero time exercise and implies that matter can move either instantaneously or at a speed that is so high as to be unimaginable in conventional sense. Conventionally, this implies a high energy input, but it may be the case either that sufficient energy is actually fully available or much less than we think is actually required.
This is all childishly put and extremely vague, but this is deliberate. Just imagine that if “everything is everything” all at once, then all information is technically available at any given moment. So, could it be possible to exist in such a way that more or all knowledge is available? Could the form of our present existence be a limiting factor in knowledge or information access, storage and recall? Could it be possible to exist in the form of information itself but not manifest as matter in the form of an organism at the same time?
As a compromise between these two conceptual extremes, what if we came to work out that the information capacity of a physical human could be radically bolstered if we came to better understand energy, matter, time and space, such that the individual’s brain could be practically filled in youth and permanently moved into DNA throughout the species? Rupert Sheldrake’s morphic field theory argues that there’s some metaphysical connection amongst a species that we do not understand how to tap within our species.
Energy
Above all else, energy is the limiting factor in doing anything at any level, where the most fundamental energy source that we know of is our Sun. From that energy source, we get food and then other forms of fuel that enables other work.
Our current energy paradigm is tied up in complex and artificially politicised and financialised forms of fuel and distribution. Because of this, human “productivity” on an individual basis is limited by our energy paradigm, as is the collective or species level “productivity”. This winter will be a harsh demonstration of both of these limits.
Our sources and use of fuel and energy are also the underpin to the notion of anthropological global warming, which is tied to pollution and environmental damage. They are also utterly fundamental to the construction of our societies.
What if we discovered that energy could be abundantly accessed at levels far beyond what we can now access and in ways which are not damaging or polluting to our environment? What would that mean for mankind and all of our societies?
It’s almost too big to imagine. Free, abundant energy would effectively liberate humans from many things that they do. They would not have to work to acquire money for heating and food production capability would be radically boosted. Entire industries involved in multi-fuel energy acquisition and processing would disappear. Major mechanisms of population control would evaporate. Politics would have to be re-engineered. Reasons for war would change (they are unlikely to diminish because they are all political).
Now, consider difference between compartmentalised access to such ubiquitous and dirt cheap (if not free) energy and equal access to it.
Any nation that had control over such an energy source would become the global, dominant master and would likely hold the rest of the world to ransom, if not enslave it. Equal access to such an energy source would, in some ways, liberate humans from many base levels of existence. This would raise the question of what humans would actually do with their lives if they had to do less work to meet their basic needs of energy, heat and food.
One might obviously argue then that abundant, cheap energy would justify population growth because that energy could be used to “fix” many of humanity’s problems around basic resource access and pollution output.
But, conversely, the opposite could be argued. Huge amounts of the world’s population spend their lives “existing” in that they still spend most of their time working to meet their basic needs and struggle to move up to the higher levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. How many of us really achieve self-actualisation in a full sense, as free as possible of conventional socioeconomic and political constraints? I haven’t and I know I will not. I’ve never met anyone who said that they had. Unless you have achieved more than a certain level of wealth, your life will be constrained by all the facets of the system you live in. When you look at those systems, huge amounts of them are largely nonsensical or artificial or abstractions of inequalities elsewhere in the system. Many of these problems are underpinned by energy generation, access and distribution, or would be radically diminished by energy abundance.
Revelation versus managed transition
Let’s just say that right now, the human race (or some of it) knows that a radical form of energy exists and can be harnessed. In a way, we are already in this position.
The human race can already generate massive amounts of electrical energy from nuclear sources that are abundant. There is more than enough money in every nation to switch to entirely nuclear energy production and make its cost to the end user extremely low.
Some quickly googled estimate for France suggested that its 58 nuclear reactors cost circa E96bn, and requires circa E55bn in maintenance to 2025. In the context of national spending over long periods of time for the fundamental underpin of energy provision, these are relatively small numbers. The USA agreed to print and spend $54bn on the Ukraine war, and it spent trillions just on war in the last 20 years, which helped no one in great numbers. A nuclear plant built today is not the same as a nuclear plant built 20 or 30 years ago. There are also thorium reactor designs which have huge potential to be very safe, much cleaner than uranium reactors, and thorium is an abundant nuclear fuel.
If the human race prioritised the democratisation of energy and the ubiquitous access to it across the planet, it stands to reason that other frivolous spending would be forgone to achieve larger amounts of nuclear-generated electricity. We can do this now, but we don’t. This means that we are not willing, using existing knowledge, technology, money and resources, to give the world a lot of fairly safe and clean enough energy. Why not?
Now, what if an even more radical form of energy was known to us? If we’re not going to fix our global energy problem now, why would we use a more radical technology to fix it faster?
In the most concentrated forms of energy consumption, we use gas, coal and oil to generate industrial levels of heat or large amounts of motive power or thrust. If we had abundant nuclear electricity, that could be used to generate a lot of industrial heat. If less fossil fuel was used for this purpose, we could still use fossil fuels for air travel and some industrial uses where gas or oil still made energy sense (cost would rise if demand decreased, bringing economies of supply and scale into play).
What if we began a radical shift or rebalance like this? Very quickly, massive numbers of people would be out of a job in the energy industry and its supply chain. Capital interests would be impacted, but that capital would switch over to the growing energy sectors. However, if the result was the global supply of ubiquitous and cheap energy, that capital would struggle to command returns demanded by those who held the capital. This financial paradigm is a block to giving the world cheap, available energy.
So, an energy revelation creates massive problems in the short or medium term, even if the long term benefits for most people make sense. Because global power works top down, not bottom up, this rapid transition or rebalancing of the energy paradigm is not going to happen en masse globally. Politics and finance are immediate blocks to improving energy for society. Then there’s the inherent lead times involved and the skills constraints. It’s unlikely that every nation could build several large nuclear reactors in the next decade on skills supply alone.
In conventional terms, we are limited to transition.
Imagine though, that within ten years, 60% of the world’s population had enough energy to have a better standard of living than today and the climate change bods were reasonably happy on a net basis? I believe that this is likely to lead, in the medium term, to a lot of people who are actually less productive in conventional capitalistic terms because suddenly they are less “incentivised” to work because a basic human need suddenly gets met by energy supply.
I can see how the fear of this outcome could lead to saying that an abundance of energy means that there’s still too many people on the planet, because more of them all need to “do” less.
Water
The strength of the two hydrogen bonds in water needs a lot of energy to split water into oxygen and hydrogen, both of which are fuels that recombine cleanly.
Heating water is a way to clean it so that it can be safely drunk. A technique for sanitising water to a significant degree is to fill a clear plastic bottle and leave it in direct sunshine on a suitable surface for 6 hours to 2 days. You can see the CDC’s method for solar disinfection here. The method is imperfect, but given its simplicity, it is remarkable.
A solar cooker using a concave mirror can cook food and boil water with sufficient sunshine. Boiling water is key to distilling it to increase its purity.
A solar concentrator power station can generate a huge amount of electricity by concentrating solar energy to superheat water and drive a generator.
Thus, we could equip people in some parts of the world with solar cookers to give them clean, potentially distilled water and the means to cook food without another fuel source. We could also construct solar power stations in equatorial coastal regions to purify water and also split it to generate hydrogen and oxygen fuel.
This is possible now.
Combining nuclear and solar technologies could radically shift the energy paradigm of the human race, as well as the standard of living via access to clean water and a means to cook. Barbecuing wouldn’t quite be the same, but I could live with that. The unreliability of solar energy could be smoothed out with accompanying nuclear and hydrogen fuel could drive clean vehicles, some industry and secondary power generation.
Energy + Water = Useless Eaters?
Imagine then that within 20 years 80% of people have access to more energy than they need and enough clean water, because both have been radically prioritised.
I think that such a prospect still enables people to suggest that the population is too high because you haven’t fixed the problem of people needing to work less.
Conversely, if basic needs are better met such that people need to work less, they have more time to move further up Maslow’s hierarchy, towards self-actualisation i.e. a higher overall standard of living.
Suddenly, capitalists have to work out how they rebalance their concepts of work and revenue. Many industries would be impacted and some very big sectors would significantly diminish. If less oil and gas was required for energy, the Middle East would radically change.
Abundant energy carries huge threats and requires massive changes, including the distribution of power and wealth in society.
Are we being transitioned via narratives for a slightly different purpose?
Let’s get into the speculative reveal of this article. Prepare for some weirdness.
What I have described so far is not revelatory. All these technologies and paradigms exist and are doable now. We just choose not to do it or, more accurately, our masters choose not to do it.
What if there was the potential for a big revelation in the background?
Let’s just suppose that the human race has known about the existence of alien or non-human technologies and energy sources that are truly radical and that point to the notion of a very different energy, matter, time and space paradigm that we have been struggling to understand. Suppose that we possess various examples of these technologies and we’ve even been in contact with non-human intelligent races for some time, possibly a lot of time.
Consider this specific scenario.
Humans know about two forms of incredible energy. One is powered by some form of fabricated solid fuel based on element 115 (Moscovium Mc) that we cannot currently recreate in that form, although we have finally managed to momentarily synthesise an isotope of element 115 with a half-life of just 0.65 seconds that is highly radioactive. The other is some form of zero-point energy that is somehow harvested from energy in the universe and, potentially, all atoms. Both forms of this energy are now known to be able to drive forms of gravity wave machines for the purpose of propulsion (or motion) and also matter manipulation e.g. a vehicle surrounded by an anti-gravity field can potentially move through matter of certain solidity by simply gravitationally displacing the matter.
If you knew of these things but couldn’t fully manufacture and use them independently of whoever else created them, what would be the point of telling mankind about them? I would argue that in many respects there may be little point telling everyone.
What if one nation cracked these technologies and one day became the only society who could make and use them? Obviously, that society would dominate mankind in all the bad ways you can imagine, long before good entered the equation. This is human nature. The world would be refashioned by that society.
Just from the human side, there is a big problem. Humans en masse don’t do change very well, and they do radical change even worse. They need medium and long term transition.
Now, flip the perspective and consider the alien or non-human side.
Aliens on earth
Human history is littered with indications of non-human, possibly extra-terrestrial intelligent lifeforms. The 1947 Roswell incident is well known and since then there have been myriad and increasingly well-documented accounts of human encounters with such lifeforms across the globe. The 2021 Netflix series Top Secret UFO Projects Declassified does a reasonable job of soberly recounting many of these key encounters while discussing some theories about why public knowledge about them remains curtailed.
There are strong commonalities throughout the global events that this series refers to:
UFO/UAP/Alien encounters are strongly associated with human nuclear technology or weapon sites.
The vehicles in the encounters have always demonstrated capabilities beyond mankind’s, including the ability to activate and deactivate human nuclear weapons systems and travel in radical ways that break our understanding of physics (speed, direction, rate of acceleration, g force change, trans-medium travel).
The ability to evade detection by human means, including vision and radar.
Descriptions of beings encountered are largely consistent but include more than one distinct type. The small, thin, large-eyed “grey” is common, but more human-like are also reported.
Many if not most of the Western accounts are provided by then serving military personnel including fighter pilots.
Multiple UFO types have been encountered in multiple countries (USA, UK, Brazil, Russia).
The phenomena are shrouded in roughly the same amount of secrecy at the governmental level around the world.
The recently released gimbal, tic tac and go fast US Navy FLIR videos depicting non-human flying craft have all been supported by first hand accounts of the FA/18 pilots who visually and technically encountered them and made the recordings. David Fravor and Ryan Graves are two of the pilots, but Fravor’s wingman (name escapes me) has recently gone public, as has Chad Underwood. The Pentagon has confirmed the authenticity of the FLIR videos, which were strangely unclassified.
Other videos, specifically a FLIR video shot by the Chilean airforce, captured the same kind of vehicle reported by US pilots, including the “cube inside a sphere” that transitions straight into water then spontaneously seems to clone from itself just in the surface of the water.
Furthermore, it appears that underwater encounters with USOs are actually an even bigger deal as this phenomenon happens even more frequently and involves vehicles that come up from the depths at impossible speeds, leave the water into the air and beyond.
Combine all of this with the increasingly multiply verified account of Bob Lazar, who first surfaced in the early 90s claiming to have worked on alien gravity propulsion systems at S4 at Groom Lake (Area 51) that was powered by solid fuel based on element 115 (which later actually made the periodic table), and what we arrive at is the increasing possibility of at least one, possibly multiple forms of non-human life who are all more technologically advanced than the human race. They also appear to be more advanced when it comes to direct communication.
In the last decade, the public reporting and access to recent and detailed accounts seems to be increasing. Also, the reported behaviour of these vehicles suggests that what’s going on below the surface of the sea is probably as if not more important than what’s been witnessed in the skies. Also, at least the US is in possession of multiple vehicles and examples of these technologies.
A long-standing transition?
Logically, it stands to reason that the human race has been mentally transitioned over nearly a century towards the acceptance of the existence of non-human lifeforms, through all forms of media, to the point that many people would not now be radically shocked if the existence of aliens and their presence on Earth was admitted to in the near future. In big picture terms, all of the above issues about energy paradigms come into play. What the human race may be facing is the existence of a totally different energy, matter, time and space paradigm that is beyond most people, for good and bad.
If this is the point which we as a species are arriving at in this century, there are radical changes on the horizon, which might relate to some very human narratives that are now at the fore:
Climate change;
Transhumanism;
Genetic engineering;
Energy and resources;
Population levels;
The Great Reset.
Before I get into these areas and try to set them in a possible “alien” context, let’s just consider a theory about what the aliens might be and how they might be interacting with us globally.
Some accounts of the multiple types of alien state that it is known to us that they all share human DNA and have one head, a torso, two arms and two legs in a bipedal stance. There is a theory that we have been genetically engineered by them in some way, possibly as a form of self-improvement or experiment. Some of them may actually have lived here for a very long time, rather than always have just visited. The intent of some of them at least may be largely benevolent in that they are trying to prevent our destruction of the planet via our further use of nuclear weapons, hence their association and interaction with nuclear sites, vehicles and equipment. Others may be scientifically curious about Earth. There are also other more extreme and malignant theories, but that’s out of scope for this article.
It appears that many developed or major developing countries’ governments are aware of these beings but no one has managed to demonstrate command of their technologies. This could be both deliberate and as a result of our inferiority of knowledge and skill. It’s possible that these beings have spread the knowledge and visibility of themselves across the globe precisely so that no one nation has monopoly over the knowledge or technologies, and that at the appropriate levels, multiple governments are at roughly equal stages of contact and collaboration/learning with these beings. This would be a potentially sensible way to manage mankind, from their perspective. Essentially, drip-feeding humanity knowledge and awareness at the high level, evenly across the globe would be a way to effectively transition the human race further into the space age at a controlled rate. Equally, it probably makes little sense to let such an immature race as humans get full knowledge of the technologies and energy systems that these beings possess, given how badly we treat each other now.
So, from a human perspective, how might present human narratives be connected to our possible growing awareness of non-human intelligence and technology?
Climate Change
If I was in the 0.1% and knew of the existence of radical energy sources and a whole other set of knowledge about the nature of the universe, I would be asking myself how I used that to my personal benefit.
If I ever intended to use these technologies and knowledge, I would have to accept either that they would eventually become public or remain secret for as long as possible. Going public would change the entire paradigm of human existence on an energy and resource basis. Keeping things secret would mean a select minority would be exploring the universe and interacting with alien everything, and this is likely what has been happening to date, so it could persist as long as the aliens themselves didn’t fully come out in ways that governments` couldn’t hide, deny, cover up or ignore any longer.
Let’s say that I accept the inevitable public reveal at some point in the future. That would mean I know that the future of fossil fuel dominance and everything associated with it will end, but for now it is one of my primary income and control streams. I would therefore string out that in any way for as long as possible, safe in the knowledge that it is a finite topic. Also finite is any problem fossil fuels might actually cause. Eventually we’ll stop using them and will have enough energy to likely reverse some of their supposed damage (CO2/climate change). With enough energy, we are likely to be able to move to molecular manufacturing, which radically changes the resource paradigm and all associated problems. We could potentially construct things at the atomic level hyper-efficiently. Imagine 3D printing on crack, meth and PCP at the atomic level. The mining industry would disappear.
In this context, what purpose would the climate change narrative serve me, the 0.1%?
On some level, it would serve an extremely simple purpose.
It would give me the manipulative ability to literally milk the current monetary system which I would also know must come to an end in parallel with the ending energy model. I could extract massive wealth from that monetary system then convert the money into asset ownership on an unprecedented scale, before switching to the new and radical energy paradigm. This switch would “make people happy” because suddenly, huge amounts of fundamental need would be satisfied, but the division between the 0.1% and everyone else would be preserved through asset and resource ownership. The slaves would be fed, warmed and watered via cheap or free energy, and I would still be able to tell them what to do.
Rabobank has set the price of climate change transition at $150tn (yes, trillion). This money, by definition, is coming from public coffers into the hands of the private few. That’s how climate gets fixed in the G3P model - by paying private companies from public money. That’s direct wealth transfer and that’s the publicly stated price of a problem that might not be real.
Once that money was milked, I could reveal that some of it was successfully spent on energy breakthroughs or even just the mass adoption of nuclear power, while I kept element 115 and zero-point energy secret.
Meanwhile, the grand solar minimum kicks in and earth starts cooling, and food production shifts to the southern hemisphere that I am fully positioned into and set to continue to control and profit from.
Transhumanism
Think more broadly about what this might mean. Uncle Klaus would have us believe this is about the monitoring, tracking and data reporting of humans to a bigger system of control and integration. I see no daily benefit to me of this concept. I literally need nothing that Digital ID, tracking of every stat and all my biodata might bring. I don’t even want my health to be constantly monitored. I’d rather live making reasonable choices, eating decent food and then dealing with dying when my time comes, as humans always have, rather than be a biodata node in someone else’s information web. I shun Fitbits and smart bollocks. I can already detect hunger, general illness, fitness, fatness and ageing because I evolved to do this. I don’t need a strap telling me I haven’t done ten thousand steps. I don’t need that knowledge going to some faceless entity to use in ways I don’t know or understand. None of that serves me in any way. I’m amazed at the number of narcissistic suckers who think they need this information with zero control or understanding of how others use it. They even pay for the privilege for no meaningful return, such is the idiocy of the human race, as reflected by the extinction of personal privacy.
So, what is the deeper level of transhumanism? Likely, it is the brain/computer/machine interface and the integration of it to information access, knowledge and learning at the individual and hive level. If I knew radically more and could apply it, and also directly benefit and contribute to the hive mind of humanity (without suffering the petty thoughts of many other dickheads) there could be individual and species level benefit. This could also encapsulate direct, non-verbal communication what could manifest as something akin to ESP or telepathy.
A logical corollary of this is also the ability to download a human into a machine and possibly transfer that into another human, effectively achieving immortality. There’s some very big issues at stake here, but Jeff Bezos and friends are very active in trying to achieve this.
All of this stuff is transhumanism. There’s more beyond this. Imagine that we could create humanoid drones that do not require food for energy and do not need to perform biological functions of eating and excreting, but can effectively convey and carry me. A biological machine. I could send that drone anywhere, including another planet. If it doesn’t need to eat or breath, the planet’s atmosphere and food is irrelevant. It if was self powered and I had a consciousness connection to it, or it manifested a version of me that I could eventually download or access, I could explore the universe by proxy while my present human form stayed on Earth.
Genetic Engineering
If we are the product of someone else’s genetic engineering and we know this, what we also know is the potential for radical evolutionary change at an accelerated rate.
Combine this with the concepts around information/knowledge upload and storage capacity, and genetic engineering could ultimately offer us the ability to pursue self-determined evolution (at whatever cost along the way).
Now consider the DNA and mRNA Covid shots. They could be our first large scale attempt to see if we can affect aspects of forced changed/self-determined genetic “evolution”, with the intent to further alter the human genome in successive iterations of the technology.
But why do they appear to be causing harm and death? This could be an intended or unintended consequence. A possible reason for intended consequence of population reduction is quite obvious, in the context of all of the above. See below.
What if the Covid shots and the intended future use of mRNA shots is the start of the iterative process of bolstering or filling human DNA with greater capability, information or knowledge, that first serves a purpose of population control, ahead of population refinement and notional “improvement” along the designs of a human minority or even that of a non-human influence?
Energy and Resources
If we radically shift or rapidly transition our energy paradigm, we then also inherently change our resource paradigm. As discussed, a few people could then effectively grow massive amounts of food 24/7 in controlled conditions without dependence upon variable natural biological processes. That does away with literally millions of jobs in food production.
If we shift to alternate forms of manufacturing, particularly at the near or actual atomic level, that’s even more jobs gone.
Just keep extrapolating the concepts of energy and resources and you keep hitting questions about what the hell most people spend their waking, working hours doing now and in the future.
It doesn’t look good for the working and middle classes.
Population Levels
So, we could end up in a world of abundant energy, adequate resources for daily life, and a reasonable standard of general living, after a gigantic asset ownership event has taken place and the 0.1% are unassailable masters.
You could see half the world’s population suddenly with very little to do. What do they all do then? Self-actualise as artists, intellectuals and such like?
If everyone can upload a lot of knowledge, even the concept of an intellectual as a defined group of “smarter than average” becomes outdated as everyone’s intellect jumps up way beyond what we know today.
You’ve still got 8 billion people to manage who know more, which makes them harder to control, but who have less work to do for the masters. Suddenly, the masters have got a shit load of direct competition and there’s a hell of a lot of competitors, assuming you democratised energy, resources and knowledge.
That’s not a good set up for the 0.1%. It would likely lead to massive wars for multiple reasons, as well as direct witch hunts for the 0.1%.
You simply wouldn’t want 8 billion people with multiple PhD levels of education in history, law, applied sciences, maths and finance. The 0.1% would be found out instantly and be lynched. You would never, ever empower a whole species like that, quickly, unless you had mechanisms of control to preserve your place in the hierarchy (and theirs).
So, arguably, the answer to these problems is a lot fewer people. Why?
Fewer people are easier to manage.
If people became orders of magnitude smarter while energy, technological production capability and food all became very available where food availability is a function of intelligence, energy and technology, each individual’s intellectual capability and contribution becomes the equivalent of many dumber people. Creativity of thought would still be occurring in the reduced population, who would then logically have more time to shift away from the consumerist and multiply defunct forms of work and industry, and towards intellectual self- and species-actualisation.
If you managed to kill off a lot of people and those who remained were still fertile or at least able to reproduce by some means, you can rebuild the population over time while enforcing and ingraining other societal models.
The Great Reset
The above could mean, in the end, that what you think of as the Great Reset as it is presented now, is actually just the visible, easily digestible version of a much, much bigger reset that is coming at some point in this century if not the next two or three decades.
It could be so far reaching, by design or accident, or a mixture of both, that by the end of this century humans could have exponentially redefined themselves (with or without direct non-human help).
Future generations may look back at how, up until this point, humans were remarkably basic and set to constantly repeat the same micro and macro behaviours because of limited knowledge, limited energy, limited resources, bad and short-sighted socioeconomic and financial models, and divisive social structures.
Humanity’s quantum development may come from lower population numbers while jacking evolution and increasing the “quality” of each individual as well as the hive.
If this is done while humans come to understand that there is radically more to the the nature of the universe, and this transition was the abandonment of the net destructive, cruel, unfair governance and management processes that gave rise to pointless war and suffering, one might see it as necessary transition or evolution.
Set within the idea that we may have ultimately been born of someone else’s direct and indirect tampering, the artificiality of this transition may be seen as a form of Nature where a lot of what humans thought was natural turned out not to be.
There are already small amounts of people who know a hell of a lot more about life, the universe and everything in it than any President or public body. These people persist and are largely unknown to the rest. These people in some ways gather, analyse and control information about incredible phenomenon that is being admitted to, bit by bit. Such knowledge and events means that the world isn’t what we think it is, and is changing on multiple levels that most people aren’t aware of.
Even if all of the reports of UFO/UAP/non-human intelligence are total lies, these narratives have existed for a long time and are allowed to keep existing to serve some purpose, which could be as simple as an alternative to other forms of religious narrative/opiate.
Is there a way I can send you a message in a private e-mail?