There's a subtle trap that we unwittingly set for ourselves whenever we formulate a goal. Understanding the nature of this trap is the key to making changes that really stick.
Love the quote from Tal Ben-Shahar at the end of your article, Robyn :-) The journey is the best part, it really is. I guess in my life, I've got my goals, sure, but I try to enjoy the journey, never knowing if I'll quite make it to my goals, but not worrying if I don't. It's a precarious path, sometimes. It's a tricky balance: it seems so easy to say 'focus on the journey', but to do that, you DO have to have goals, yet you can't let yourself get carried away by them!
I'm not sure that enjoying my journey brings me happiness, though. I rather think happiness is a state of being. You choose to be happy or you don't. And when you choose to be happy, you make better decisions for yourself, I suppose. Is it all intertwined, then?
As for New Year's resolutions? I don't think I've done them for decades!! :-D I figured that if I wanted to change something, I'd do it NOW - or whatever was the most appropriate time was for it, not wait for some arbitrary date to roll by each year. Honestly, 365 days is a LONG time to wait if you need/want to make changes in your life!!
I don't think there's a dichotomy between happiness being a state of mind, and happiness being the product of working towards meaningful goals. People who choose to be happy, as you put it, are those who fully embrace living with purpose. I've never met anyone whom I would consider happy, who lived an aimless life.
Agreed, but at least Levin is sharing his research, unlike all the secret military ops. I have read the Japanese are well progressed, probably many others are also. Yep, the WEFfers are their ilk will be well versed in how to use this tech for their own purposes. Billy G likely has international patents already.
Welcome to a 'brave new world.' I also find it quite disturbing, especially since the most sinister elements in society will have the keys. I wonder have far darpa and other secret ops programs are along with this research, my guess is much farther than we can imagine. If an alien invasion occurs then we know it's likely they came from a lab and not outer space.
Cheers for the link, it's an excellent article. Another guess here is that Levin is not alone in this research and that he and his team are in the rear view mirror of globalist factions who will seek to use this knowledge for their own ungodly transhumanist agendas. They have talked about armies of transhumanist robots, so we know that's part of their future dream.
Levin is a technocrat's dream - he considers only the 'coolness' of his own work, without stopping to seriously consider its morality - and regardless of his own motives and intentions for his work, I have absolutely no doubt that it will be used by the predator class for their anti-human agenda.
Great question. My guess is that during construction of a cell, the ion channels are configured to an active but neutral configuration and a bio-electric field results from the chemical interaction with the electrolyte it is immersed in. Once a cell has electrical potential, it can then communicate via electric signals with other cells and get instructions from higher orders of intelligence. While humans have a neural system, the entire body is actually a neural system that continually communicates via electrical signalling. There is a hierarchy of intelligence with the CNS being the main processor, cells are tiny nodes. As more cells group together, increasingly higher levels of intelligence can interact with them. My background is electronics, so I liken it to building an antenna, a very small antenna can receive a few radio stations but a huge antenna can receive thousands. My belief is that one of the reasons we don't find fossilised remains of complicated inorganic manufactured 'things' from past eras is because they used bio-organic manufacturing, they 'grew' everything they wanted. A human being is the most complicated device on Earth and they are bio-organically manufactured, which gives reason that anything can be bio-manufactured. Who needs 3D printing:-) Wouldn't it be a very environmentally friendly and low energy way to make stuff, programmed creation.
I find the idea of 'programmed creation' unbelievably disturbing. This is the essence of transhumanism, - the notion that humans (or at least some humans) have both the wisdom and the right to direct evolution to their own ends. This is the ultimate in hubris, and I don't see it ending well.
Levin states that the genes encode the proteins that form the cell architecture, but they don't operate the ion channels, the intelligence to do that comes from the bio-electric fields. It's bio-electricity that configures the ion channels, not the DNA. It must be this way because intelligence is happening at higher than gene levels to determine cell, organ or tissue form and structure, this information is held within the electric fields which is outside of the gene's spatial realm. Levin is clear on this from around the 30 minute mark of the video. By switching the cell transistors (the ion channels), it changes the electrical gradient and this determines what each cell and cell groups will do. Get the right electrical pattern and you can make cells dow whatever you want, no gene or DNA manifpulation is required. The DNA and genes are the hardware and the bioelectric fields are the software. Levin even says it's OK if the hardware is a little wonky, that can be fixed by modifying the electrical gradient/signature of groups of cells. It's just brilliant, there are so many implications, surely Levin and co must be serious contenders for a Nobel prize.
And what generates the bioelectric field, when it isn't being manipulating by transhumanist researchers? I used that term advisedly, as Levin himself has written admiringly of the "transhumanist ideal of a more perfect union of technology, biology, and society" (https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2021.650726/full).
That’s a guess, ancient texts often use epochs or eras rather than what we refer to as dates or years. I was referring to a time about 200 divine years ago, which is 72,000 years. We are currently about 5,000 years into the kaliyug (era of strife), described as a time where up is down, right is wrong and the Earth is veiled in ignorance. These times were often described as an unfriendly era and best avoided, being that a soul born into this era had little chance of evolution into higher realms of existence.
Yes, Sheldrake is brilliant. I had noted that quote by Levin. They desire to manipulate the electrical gradient (electrical field) by turning transistors on and off, this is exactly how modern electronic devices work. As electronic devices are ‘logical’ devices, so is an organism a bio-logical device. Do you have any ideas how ion channel proteins can be turned on or off?
Definitely not my area of expertise, but my guess would be that they alter the permeability of the ion channel. This might be how: "one way to close the pore is to have a oily, or hydrophobic, region that prevents the water-bound ions from going through — similar to the way that oil and water don’t mix. - https://news.feinberg.northwestern.edu/2017/02/21/understanding-how-calcium-channels-open-and-close/
Out of my field of expertise also. I have read there are multiple ways to affect ion channels such as what you suggest and other bio-chemical methods. In Levin's case, they must have very accurate control over many ion channels in each cell, or groups of cells. I am thinking electrical signalling. As Levin says, the electrical gradient/signature is what is controlling what the cells become and the form they build. Perhaps they have tight control over and can modify these electrical signatures which then determines the ion channel status. I have read Russian scientists have modified simple organisms using encoded light during initial growth stages. All very interesting.
This is highly reminiscent of Rupert Sheldrake's notion of morphogenetic fields.
Note that at 8.30, Levin says "What we learned to do is to manipulate this electrical gradient, and the important thing is that we don't apply electricity. What we do instead was we turned on and off the little transistors - they're actual ion channel proteins - that every cell natively uses to set up this electrical state."
In other words, the electrical field that causes the bundle of identical cells to organise into the highly specialised cells of a particular organism, is generated by ion channel proteins that are coded for in the organism's DNA - remembering that genes are instruction manuals for building proteins (see https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/howgeneswork/makingprotein/ for a concise explanation). Only when the native electrical signal generated by these DNA-created ion channel proteins is interfered with by outside forces, does the organism fail to develop normally.
With WEF, digital ID and transhumanism just around the corner, we are on a slippery slope to oblivion, and there is zero we can do about, sure protest if you think that will make a difference, but the 1984 concept scenario is looking more like fact not fiction, they trialed that scenario on our population for the last 2 years to see what they could get away with and what rights they could remove and the majority fell for it hook line and sinker, they lied and cheated everyone and now the truth has come out, was there mass protests over this...no, why... because society has been flooded with the "woke brigade narrative" and "sensitive butterflies", our society is now feeble and weak waiting to see what the TV will tell them to do, cognitive dissonance is rife among us...Goodluck you'll need it...for what's coming
I see all the dangers that you see but I'm not quite as black-pilled. Although most people have been disappointingly cowardly, the widespread uprising in China right now is evidence that when you push people too far - even if they've been cowed into obedience through overt and covert threats - they do start to fight back. And the other reason for my cautious optimism is that the predator class is not in full agreement with each other. Jerome Powell, for example, doesn't seem willing to tank the US$ in order to give up world reserve currency status, as the WEF wants him to do, and Putin and Xi have their own ideas about how the NWO is going to function, and what their place in it will be.
‘Since the first complex organisms developed, genes have been wiring the neural circuitry of each species to maximise their own survival, by generating feelings of reward or pleasure in an organism’s nervous system when it engages in activities that promote gene survival (finding food, having sex)…’ Do you know exactly where did the genes gain their intelligence (to wire neural circuitry) and their survival skills? Was it the big bang?
Humans were designed to experience bliss, but duality or separation had destined them to a gradual loss of connection to the creative force and bliss. Craving bliss, but not knowing where or how to find it, humans settled for happiness and pleasure, but both required continual effort and were poor substitutes for bliss, resulting in regression from ‘human being’ to ‘human doing’.
To extricate oneself from the Darwinian trance is not easy but brings one closer to the truth. If one searches diligently, they will find the over-whelming evidence of human de-evolution from previous advanced civilisations. This truth is slowly entering the mainstream through people like Graham Hancock, but has been known for thousands of years outside of popular western culture.
Nobody can say exactly who or what is responsible, but there are clues in nature and other places. We can see that everything in nature is based on very specific geometry and mathematics, the golden ratio, phi. This indicates a supreme intelligence, with nothing left to chance. Vedic texts such as the Shrimad Bhagavatam speak of Earthly beings that existed around 75,000 years ago who had the ability to create life from scratch, perhaps we are their vision of human. It's interesting to note that manipulation at the genetic level was not required to alter or create life, genes have no intelligence, they cannot form complex shapes, that's controlled by micro-electric fields. Modern science is right now on the cusp of this re-discovery, see the work of Michael Levin.
We can both acknowledge that there are gaps in our epistemologies; I cannot tell you the exact mechanism by which genes influence neural circuitry (note that at no time did I attribute 'intelligence' to genes, and in fact I acknowledged that my discussion "use[d] some artistic licence to anthropomorphise strings of nucleotides), and you cannot tell me who or what designed humans. The major difference between our epistemologies is how they deal with those knowledge gaps. Evolutionary biology makes predictions that are testable - that is, it is falsifiable, in Popper's terminology. The notion of a supreme intelligence which designed the universe "with nothing left to chance" is inherently unfalsifiable, as it presupposes that everything that currently exists was designed to be just the way it is.
Falsifiability is the distinguishing criterion between the scientific approach to knowledge, and nonscientific approaches. I am not saying that there is no place for nonscientific approaches, or for faith or belief in supernatural forces; it's a matter of record that many famous scientists were/are people of faith. It's just that any discussion we try to have about topics like this is going to run into this problem of incompatible epistemologies.
Incidentally, I see no inherent conflict between an evolutionary explanation for biological life, and the instantiation of mathematical and geometric forms. This is an expression of consilience: everything in the universe conforms to the laws of physics; these laws of physics (which are mathematical) determine the laws of chemistry, which determine the laws of biochemistry, and genes operate at the level of biochemistry. Even the form in which DNA appears - the double helix - is an instantiation of the utility of geometry to the expression of the uniqueness of each human.
Nor do I see any conflict between micro-electric fields and the operation of genes. I am not sure why the notion that genes play a key role in biology is so upsetting to you.
Also I'm not sure what you mean by your statement that "manipulation at the genetic level was not required to alter or create life" - could you clarify? Who or what would be doing this "manipulation" (prior to the current era of human meddling, that is)?
That's a excellent question which, once again, goes to the heart of the matter of epistemology - how do we know what we know, and how are knowledge claims established?
Yahavah El Shaddai, we share his DNA, those who get the jab are breaking the direct link between our Father in the Shamayim, are then nothing more than hybrids a bit like the Nephilim aka human hybrids
Love the quote from Tal Ben-Shahar at the end of your article, Robyn :-) The journey is the best part, it really is. I guess in my life, I've got my goals, sure, but I try to enjoy the journey, never knowing if I'll quite make it to my goals, but not worrying if I don't. It's a precarious path, sometimes. It's a tricky balance: it seems so easy to say 'focus on the journey', but to do that, you DO have to have goals, yet you can't let yourself get carried away by them!
I'm not sure that enjoying my journey brings me happiness, though. I rather think happiness is a state of being. You choose to be happy or you don't. And when you choose to be happy, you make better decisions for yourself, I suppose. Is it all intertwined, then?
As for New Year's resolutions? I don't think I've done them for decades!! :-D I figured that if I wanted to change something, I'd do it NOW - or whatever was the most appropriate time was for it, not wait for some arbitrary date to roll by each year. Honestly, 365 days is a LONG time to wait if you need/want to make changes in your life!!
I don't think there's a dichotomy between happiness being a state of mind, and happiness being the product of working towards meaningful goals. People who choose to be happy, as you put it, are those who fully embrace living with purpose. I've never met anyone whom I would consider happy, who lived an aimless life.
Agreed, but at least Levin is sharing his research, unlike all the secret military ops. I have read the Japanese are well progressed, probably many others are also. Yep, the WEFfers are their ilk will be well versed in how to use this tech for their own purposes. Billy G likely has international patents already.
Welcome to a 'brave new world.' I also find it quite disturbing, especially since the most sinister elements in society will have the keys. I wonder have far darpa and other secret ops programs are along with this research, my guess is much farther than we can imagine. If an alien invasion occurs then we know it's likely they came from a lab and not outer space.
Cheers for the link, it's an excellent article. Another guess here is that Levin is not alone in this research and that he and his team are in the rear view mirror of globalist factions who will seek to use this knowledge for their own ungodly transhumanist agendas. They have talked about armies of transhumanist robots, so we know that's part of their future dream.
Levin is a technocrat's dream - he considers only the 'coolness' of his own work, without stopping to seriously consider its morality - and regardless of his own motives and intentions for his work, I have absolutely no doubt that it will be used by the predator class for their anti-human agenda.
Great question. My guess is that during construction of a cell, the ion channels are configured to an active but neutral configuration and a bio-electric field results from the chemical interaction with the electrolyte it is immersed in. Once a cell has electrical potential, it can then communicate via electric signals with other cells and get instructions from higher orders of intelligence. While humans have a neural system, the entire body is actually a neural system that continually communicates via electrical signalling. There is a hierarchy of intelligence with the CNS being the main processor, cells are tiny nodes. As more cells group together, increasingly higher levels of intelligence can interact with them. My background is electronics, so I liken it to building an antenna, a very small antenna can receive a few radio stations but a huge antenna can receive thousands. My belief is that one of the reasons we don't find fossilised remains of complicated inorganic manufactured 'things' from past eras is because they used bio-organic manufacturing, they 'grew' everything they wanted. A human being is the most complicated device on Earth and they are bio-organically manufactured, which gives reason that anything can be bio-manufactured. Who needs 3D printing:-) Wouldn't it be a very environmentally friendly and low energy way to make stuff, programmed creation.
I find the idea of 'programmed creation' unbelievably disturbing. This is the essence of transhumanism, - the notion that humans (or at least some humans) have both the wisdom and the right to direct evolution to their own ends. This is the ultimate in hubris, and I don't see it ending well.
Levin states that the genes encode the proteins that form the cell architecture, but they don't operate the ion channels, the intelligence to do that comes from the bio-electric fields. It's bio-electricity that configures the ion channels, not the DNA. It must be this way because intelligence is happening at higher than gene levels to determine cell, organ or tissue form and structure, this information is held within the electric fields which is outside of the gene's spatial realm. Levin is clear on this from around the 30 minute mark of the video. By switching the cell transistors (the ion channels), it changes the electrical gradient and this determines what each cell and cell groups will do. Get the right electrical pattern and you can make cells dow whatever you want, no gene or DNA manifpulation is required. The DNA and genes are the hardware and the bioelectric fields are the software. Levin even says it's OK if the hardware is a little wonky, that can be fixed by modifying the electrical gradient/signature of groups of cells. It's just brilliant, there are so many implications, surely Levin and co must be serious contenders for a Nobel prize.
And what generates the bioelectric field, when it isn't being manipulating by transhumanist researchers? I used that term advisedly, as Levin himself has written admiringly of the "transhumanist ideal of a more perfect union of technology, biology, and society" (https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2021.650726/full).
That’s a guess, ancient texts often use epochs or eras rather than what we refer to as dates or years. I was referring to a time about 200 divine years ago, which is 72,000 years. We are currently about 5,000 years into the kaliyug (era of strife), described as a time where up is down, right is wrong and the Earth is veiled in ignorance. These times were often described as an unfriendly era and best avoided, being that a soul born into this era had little chance of evolution into higher realms of existence.
Yes, Sheldrake is brilliant. I had noted that quote by Levin. They desire to manipulate the electrical gradient (electrical field) by turning transistors on and off, this is exactly how modern electronic devices work. As electronic devices are ‘logical’ devices, so is an organism a bio-logical device. Do you have any ideas how ion channel proteins can be turned on or off?
Definitely not my area of expertise, but my guess would be that they alter the permeability of the ion channel. This might be how: "one way to close the pore is to have a oily, or hydrophobic, region that prevents the water-bound ions from going through — similar to the way that oil and water don’t mix. - https://news.feinberg.northwestern.edu/2017/02/21/understanding-how-calcium-channels-open-and-close/
Much more is revealed in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLiHLDrOTW8
Out of my field of expertise also. I have read there are multiple ways to affect ion channels such as what you suggest and other bio-chemical methods. In Levin's case, they must have very accurate control over many ion channels in each cell, or groups of cells. I am thinking electrical signalling. As Levin says, the electrical gradient/signature is what is controlling what the cells become and the form they build. Perhaps they have tight control over and can modify these electrical signatures which then determines the ion channel status. I have read Russian scientists have modified simple organisms using encoded light during initial growth stages. All very interesting.
And yet, at the end of the day, the electrical gradient is created by the ion channels which are operated by proteins coded for by DNA.
Levin TED talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XheAMrS8Q1c
This is highly reminiscent of Rupert Sheldrake's notion of morphogenetic fields.
Note that at 8.30, Levin says "What we learned to do is to manipulate this electrical gradient, and the important thing is that we don't apply electricity. What we do instead was we turned on and off the little transistors - they're actual ion channel proteins - that every cell natively uses to set up this electrical state."
In other words, the electrical field that causes the bundle of identical cells to organise into the highly specialised cells of a particular organism, is generated by ion channel proteins that are coded for in the organism's DNA - remembering that genes are instruction manuals for building proteins (see https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/howgeneswork/makingprotein/ for a concise explanation). Only when the native electrical signal generated by these DNA-created ion channel proteins is interfered with by outside forces, does the organism fail to develop normally.
With WEF, digital ID and transhumanism just around the corner, we are on a slippery slope to oblivion, and there is zero we can do about, sure protest if you think that will make a difference, but the 1984 concept scenario is looking more like fact not fiction, they trialed that scenario on our population for the last 2 years to see what they could get away with and what rights they could remove and the majority fell for it hook line and sinker, they lied and cheated everyone and now the truth has come out, was there mass protests over this...no, why... because society has been flooded with the "woke brigade narrative" and "sensitive butterflies", our society is now feeble and weak waiting to see what the TV will tell them to do, cognitive dissonance is rife among us...Goodluck you'll need it...for what's coming
I see all the dangers that you see but I'm not quite as black-pilled. Although most people have been disappointingly cowardly, the widespread uprising in China right now is evidence that when you push people too far - even if they've been cowed into obedience through overt and covert threats - they do start to fight back. And the other reason for my cautious optimism is that the predator class is not in full agreement with each other. Jerome Powell, for example, doesn't seem willing to tank the US$ in order to give up world reserve currency status, as the WEF wants him to do, and Putin and Xi have their own ideas about how the NWO is going to function, and what their place in it will be.
‘Since the first complex organisms developed, genes have been wiring the neural circuitry of each species to maximise their own survival, by generating feelings of reward or pleasure in an organism’s nervous system when it engages in activities that promote gene survival (finding food, having sex)…’ Do you know exactly where did the genes gain their intelligence (to wire neural circuitry) and their survival skills? Was it the big bang?
Humans were designed to experience bliss, but duality or separation had destined them to a gradual loss of connection to the creative force and bliss. Craving bliss, but not knowing where or how to find it, humans settled for happiness and pleasure, but both required continual effort and were poor substitutes for bliss, resulting in regression from ‘human being’ to ‘human doing’.
To extricate oneself from the Darwinian trance is not easy but brings one closer to the truth. If one searches diligently, they will find the over-whelming evidence of human de-evolution from previous advanced civilisations. This truth is slowly entering the mainstream through people like Graham Hancock, but has been known for thousands of years outside of popular western culture.
By whom, or by what, were humans designed, and how do you know this?
Nobody can say exactly who or what is responsible, but there are clues in nature and other places. We can see that everything in nature is based on very specific geometry and mathematics, the golden ratio, phi. This indicates a supreme intelligence, with nothing left to chance. Vedic texts such as the Shrimad Bhagavatam speak of Earthly beings that existed around 75,000 years ago who had the ability to create life from scratch, perhaps we are their vision of human. It's interesting to note that manipulation at the genetic level was not required to alter or create life, genes have no intelligence, they cannot form complex shapes, that's controlled by micro-electric fields. Modern science is right now on the cusp of this re-discovery, see the work of Michael Levin.
We can both acknowledge that there are gaps in our epistemologies; I cannot tell you the exact mechanism by which genes influence neural circuitry (note that at no time did I attribute 'intelligence' to genes, and in fact I acknowledged that my discussion "use[d] some artistic licence to anthropomorphise strings of nucleotides), and you cannot tell me who or what designed humans. The major difference between our epistemologies is how they deal with those knowledge gaps. Evolutionary biology makes predictions that are testable - that is, it is falsifiable, in Popper's terminology. The notion of a supreme intelligence which designed the universe "with nothing left to chance" is inherently unfalsifiable, as it presupposes that everything that currently exists was designed to be just the way it is.
Falsifiability is the distinguishing criterion between the scientific approach to knowledge, and nonscientific approaches. I am not saying that there is no place for nonscientific approaches, or for faith or belief in supernatural forces; it's a matter of record that many famous scientists were/are people of faith. It's just that any discussion we try to have about topics like this is going to run into this problem of incompatible epistemologies.
Incidentally, I see no inherent conflict between an evolutionary explanation for biological life, and the instantiation of mathematical and geometric forms. This is an expression of consilience: everything in the universe conforms to the laws of physics; these laws of physics (which are mathematical) determine the laws of chemistry, which determine the laws of biochemistry, and genes operate at the level of biochemistry. Even the form in which DNA appears - the double helix - is an instantiation of the utility of geometry to the expression of the uniqueness of each human.
Nor do I see any conflict between micro-electric fields and the operation of genes. I am not sure why the notion that genes play a key role in biology is so upsetting to you.
Also I'm not sure what you mean by your statement that "manipulation at the genetic level was not required to alter or create life" - could you clarify? Who or what would be doing this "manipulation" (prior to the current era of human meddling, that is)?
wow, really 75,000 years ago, so how exactly did they date this?
That's a excellent question which, once again, goes to the heart of the matter of epistemology - how do we know what we know, and how are knowledge claims established?
Yahavah El Shaddai, we share his DNA, those who get the jab are breaking the direct link between our Father in the Shamayim, are then nothing more than hybrids a bit like the Nephilim aka human hybrids
Again, how do you know this to be true? I am not saying that you are wrong, I just want to understand your epistemology.