Immortality & Resurrection Inc.


Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
June 13, 2017

Just when you thought the aspirations and plans of modern science couldn’t possibly become more diabolical (or, if one prefer, sacrilegious), an article comes along to renew your hope that the world continues on its path of normalcy, and that many scientists are, indeed, just as wild-eyed-nuts as you always thought them to be. And this week, apparently many people were relieved and reassured that the mad scientist is not a thing of the past or a species that died out, but a real, living creature deserving of our awe and respect. Ms. M.W. and many others found this, and shared it, doubtless because they were concerned that I was losing hope that there were no more mad scientists:

Could we soon REVERSE death? US company to start trials ‘reawakening the dead’ in Latin America ‘in a few months’ – and this is how they’ll do it

Way back when I first started writing about these strange topics in The Giza Death Star, I made the observation that physical immortality might not be such a good thing, without a commensurate and corresponding improvement in human spirituality and morality. In this, I took my cue from an ancient Greek Church Father named St. John Chrysostom, who warned about the same thing, and who stated that it was death, in fact, that formed the crucial condition for the possibility of human repentance and a change of mind, for it cut off further progress in evil. Taking this as my cue, in the final pages of that book, I asked people to imagine if such immortality were possible, or even a dramatically extended life span were possible – both of which are now being openly discussed and touted in serious and not-so-serious literature – what it might mean for the resulting civilization? One thing that would result, I pointed out, was a vastly expanded and accelerated scientific and technological development. One individual would, in such a condition, be able to learn and to master several academic disciplines, not just one.The explosion of technology and science would dwarf anything we have seen thus far. But the other consequence would be for moral progress. Imagine, I said back then, an Albert Schweitzer having not a century, but centuries or even millennia to do good things, or, conversely, a Mao Tse-Tung, a Josif Stalin, a Pol Pot or an Adolf Hitler, having that long to “perfect their progress in evil,” and one gets a clear picture of the sharp moral contradictions such a society would be in. And please note: this problem is not a problem that, to my knowledge, is receiving anything close to the attention it needs in the transhumanism-virtual immortality community. The sole focus is on the science; if we can do it, we should do it.

Now we have this:

Bioquark, a Philadelphia-based company, announced in late 2016 that they believe brain death is not ‘irreversible’.

And now, CEO Ira Pastor has revealed they will soon be testing an unprecedented stem cell method on patients in an unidentified country in Latin America, confirming the details in the next few months.

To be declared officially dead in the majority of countries, you have to experience complete and irreversible loss of brain function, or ‘brain death’.

According to Pastor, Bioquark has developed a series of injections that can reboot the brain – and they plan to try it out on humans this year.

They have no plans to test on animals first.

The first stage, named ‘First In Human Neuro-Regeneration & Neuro-Reanimation’ was slated to be a non-randomized, single group ‘proof of concept’ study.

The team said they planned to examine individuals aged 15-65 declared brain dead from a traumatic brain injury using MRI scans, in order to look for possible signs of brain death reversal.

Specifically, they planned to break it down into three stages.

First, they would harvest stem cells from the patient’s own blood, and inject this back into their body.

Next, the patient would receive a dose of peptides injected into their spinal cord.

Finally, they would undergo a 15-day course of nerve stimulation involving lasers and median nerve stimulation to try and bring about the reversal of brain death, whilst monitoring the patients using MRI scans.

Light, chemistry, and stem cells and DNA. If one didn’t know any better, one would swear one was looking at the broad chronological progression of Genesis 1.

But I digress.

The problem here is, one notices, the almost complete avoidance of the moral question. Let’s assume the technology works and that one can, literally, resurrect the dead scientifically. And let us assume the project reaches the stage of perfection envisioned by the Russian Cosmists, like Nikolai Fedorov. The cosmists, recall, want to extend the resurrection-by-science principle to the entire history of one’s ancestors. But should this occur, then what about resurrecting people like Stalin, Mao, or Hitler? The sad truth is, some people still “revere” those twisted and murderous people as heroes. The sad truth is, some people would attempt to do it, if given the means to do so.

But there’s an even bigger problem. The entire project is predicated on the materialist assumption that “brain function equals the person.” Regular readers here know that I have never subscribed to such a view, nor have I subscribed to the view, conversely, that there is no relationship between a person’s “personhood” and the functions of their soul, which would include, of course, the functions of their will, intellect, emotions, and brain. It is, I suspect, a very complex phenomenon not neatly divided into tidy Cartesian dualisms, with numerous feedback loops between the two. This said, however, the problem arises then that the brain is not the creator of individuality, but rather, its transducer (and, if I may employ a more ancient version of the term, its traducer). Thus, the possibility arises that one might “revive” a brain, and traduce or transduce a different individual than one “recalls” being present prior to brain death. Already some psychologists have written – and published – papers suggesting that certain mental disorders such as bipolarity and schizophrenia might not be disorders in any standard sense, but rather a phenomenon where an individual is inhabiting two very different and parallel universes at the same time. In this they draw upon the many worlds hypotheses of qauntum mechanics.

In short, for my money, I have no doubt that ultimately, some sort of “scientific” resurrection technique might be possible. But I suspect it will be a Pandora’s box of spiritual phenomena which, once opened, will be difficult if not impossible to close again, and that before we open it, we should give lengthy, and due consideration to all the moral problems it will engender.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Advertisements

Ray Kurzweil’s plan for immortality is missing one thing: you

DNA
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpresscom
Jon Rappoport
March 24, 2017

In a Wired interview (11/18/02), leading transhumanist and Google’s director of engineering, Ray Kurzweil, spoke about living forever. He was asked: “Will you have your entire body preserved or just your head?”

The usual method of preservation, upon physical death, is freezing. Then, when the technology exists, sometime later, there would be the unfreezing and the reanimation. The dead person would come back to life…

Kurzweil said: “I think there’s some part of our identity and valuable information in our bodies. There’s more in our brains, but there’s some in our bodies as well. It gets into some technical issues. There’s a better way of preserving the brain, which they haven’t been able to do with the whole body yet. The vitrification process, which does a better job of preserving structural integrity in the cells, they do with the head but not with the body. At any rate, I’d go for the grade A plan.”

Kurzweil would apparently have his brain and body preserved, for future reanimation.

There is, of course, an underlying question:

What about consciousness?

Assuming the technology will exist to “bring back” the body and the brain, will the consciousness of being alive exist? Or will the process reinstitute something entirely mechanical?

Mechanical, as in: “The car was sitting in the garage on blocks for 50 years, and then we fixed it and made it start again.”

Biologists and physicists are bothered by the “consciousness question.” When they discuss it, they assume the brain produces consciousness because, well, where else could awareness come from? In other words, they resort to unscientific circular reasoning.

At the same time, they assert that the basis for all matter and energy in the universe is tiny particles; none of those particles have consciousness; and the particles make up the brain; the brain is composed entirely of those non-conscious particles.

This is called a trap. Hard scientists have no reason to assume consciousness exists at all. Yet it does exist. That implies consciousness is coming from somewhere other than the brain, somewhere other than particles—but according to these scientists, that “other somewhere” doesn’t exist.

So they retreat back into “consciousness is in the brain”—even though by their own science, it isn’t.

Preserving body and brain in a state of suspended animation, and then bringing it back, would not, according to a proper reading of their own science, bring back consciousness.

What would come back is some sort of mechanical functioning, and nothing else.

A conscious Ray Kurzweil would never come back.

His body and brain might hum again, like an old car that was fixed, but that’s all.

People continue to argue, of course, that in some very complex way the brain causes consciousness, we just don’t know how yet, but we’re getting there. That’s not evidence. That’s a naked assumption. They may as well be saying the moon is surely made of cheese and one day we’ll prove it, so for now just accept it.

“Well, folks, we just brought back Ray Kurzweil from fifty years of suspended animation. Remember him? He was a futurist at Google, or the CIA, it’s hard to tell which. Apparently the two organizations were one. Anyway, Ray is back.”

“Wonderful. Is he talking?”

“There is brain activity. No talking yet.”

“Is he looking at anything?”

“We assume so. His eyes are open. Also, his hands are opening and closing.”

“Is he gesturing?”

“It’s theoretically possible.”

“Is he conscious?”

“Of course. There is brain activity.”

“Well, there could be brain activity without consciousness.”

“Where did you pick up that idea? Are you crazy? He’s conscious. That’s all there is to it.”

“Maybe there is no ‘he’. There are just electrical signals.”

“Idiot. Life is electrical signals. What else could life be?”

“Life could be conscious, as in ‘hello I’m alive and I’d like to take a walk and look at the clouds and read a book and here’s an interesting passage on page ten, let’s discuss it’.”

“What’s your name again? Guards, take this man to the re-education center. He’s lost his basic programming…”

Ray, your reanimated brain and body aren’t going to bring back conscious-you. (You might reincarnate in a quite different way, but that’s a different story for another time…)

But don’t despair. In the future, when there are 10,000 brains and bodies in a warehouse, and technology allows them to be reactivated, they might, combined, generate enough electricity to run, say, a toaster, a refrigerator, and an oven in a micro apartment in San Francisco.

More at: JonRappoport.wordpresscom

Book Review: Immortality Of The Gods by Nick Redfern

immortality-of-the-gods2
TheBreakaway
Zy Marquiez
January 15, 2017

Nick Redfern is an author that has tackled a variety of subjects, and in this book he does no different.  In Immortality Of The Gods, Redfern seeks to ascertain whether or not there’s any substance to the legends of immortality throughout time.

In its nascent stage, the book begins with the argument that in ancient times there were beings that had extraordinary life spans due to incredible elixirs such as the White Powder Gold, Manna, Indian Amirita, and other potions.  Drawing from wide-ranging sources that range from the Bible, the Epic of Gilgamesh, Sumerian sources and more, Redfern collates data based on stories that claim beings with extensive lifespans have lived through various periods in our history, although more notably in our ancient past.

Some of these individuals include Count St. Germain, Adam, Methuselah, Seth, and a few others.

Furthermore, not only does Redfern examine ancient sources, but the author also examines more modern cases that dovetail more into the UFO field, such as the case of Valiant Thor.

While the book does make an argument compelling enough to further research, the book isn’t without its flaws.

First, some sources are much stronger than others.  This makes for a book that could have possibly been really good into a book that’s still worth a read, but okay at best.  Granted, tackling a subject of this magnitude isn’t exactly a walk in the park, however, drawing information from books/articles just because it exists doesn’t mean it’s going to bring credibility to the book, especially in a subject that’s already incredibly convoluted.

Secondly, the author uses many sources, which is fantastic.  However, when quoting from these sources the author never once sources the pages of material where applicable.  It wouldn’t have taken much effort to do that, and an independent researcher will have to leaf through thousands of pages to find out what parts of which books information used by the author is at.  Any solid researcher will have a nightmare trying to further research topics covered within this particular book.

Overall, if you’re really interested in the subject the book does have some intriguing information to take note of.  That said, some of the information provided could certainly be read – or interpreted – in different manners, which leaves some areas of the book quite lacking.