Science & Tech

Athiest Dawkins Says ‘Eugenics Would Work’

Published

2 years ago

17 February, 2020

Steve Watson

Don Arnold/Getty Images

“Facts ignore ideology”

In a set of rather bizarre tweets on Sunday, notorious atheist Richard Dawkins argued that eugenics, the practice of selective breeding supported by the Nazis, would work perfectly well if applied to humans, because it works on animals.

“It’s one thing to deplore eugenics on ideological, political, moral grounds. It’s quite another to conclude that it wouldn’t work in practice,” Dawkins wrote.

“Of course it would. It works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses. Why on earth wouldn’t it work for humans? Facts ignore ideology,” he added.

It’s one thing to deplore eugenics on ideological, political, moral grounds. It’s quite another to conclude that it wouldn’t work in practice. Of course it would. It works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses. Why on earth wouldn’t it work for humans? Facts ignore ideology.

— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) February 16, 2020

Okaaaay, Mein Führer.

Sensing that his comments would generate immediate backlash and Hitler comparisons, Dawkins clarified that he wasn’t advocating for eugenics, merely acknowledging that it would be a very effective practice.

“For those determined to miss the point, I deplore the idea of a eugenic policy,” he said.

“I simply said deploring it doesn’t mean it wouldn’t work. Just as we breed cows to yield more milk, we could breed humans to run faster or jump higher. But heaven forbid that we should do it.” Dawkins explained.

A eugenic policy would be bad. I’m combating the illogical step from “X would be bad” to “So X is impossible”. It would work in the same sense as it works for cows. Let’s fight it on moral grounds. Deny obvious scientific facts & we lose – or at best derail – the argument.

— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) February 16, 2020

Dawkins has previously made his thoughts on eugenics clear, writing that he suspects “that the idea is too dangerous for comfortable discussion, and my conjecture is that Adolf Hitler is responsible for the change.”

“Nobody wants to be caught agreeing with that monster, even in a single particular.” Dawkins continued, adding “The spectre of Hitler has led some scientists to stray from “ought” to “is” and deny that breeding for human qualities is even possible.”

“But if you can breed cattle for milk yield, horses for running speed, and dogs for herding skill, why on Earth should it be impossible to breed humans for mathematical, musical or athletic ability? Objections such as ‘these are not one-dimensional abilities’ apply equally to cows, horses and dogs and never stopped anybody in practice.” Dawkins urged.

“In the 1920s and 1930s, scientists from both the political left and right would not have found the idea of designer babies particularly dangerous – though of course they would not have used that phrase.” Dawkins further asserted.

“I wonder whether, some 60 years after Hitler’s death, we might at least venture to ask what the moral difference is between breeding for musical ability and forcing a child to take music lessons. Or why it is acceptable to train fast runners and high jumpers but not to breed them. I can think of some answers, and they are good ones, which would probably end up persuading me. But hasn’t the time come when we should stop being frightened even to put the question?” the evolutionary biologist stated.

Dawkins’ latest considerations on eugenics quickly opened up a torrent of disbelief.

Greg Epstein, Humanist Chaplain at Harvard University, was one of the first to respond:

So unacceptable for Richard Dawkins to tweet about eugenics without clearly condemning it. Dawkins is *supposedly* one of our exemplars of humanism & science outreach. Yet today he's given every manner of passive and active bigot an opening to "consider" persecution on steroids. https://t.co/jycoxZQJFP

— Greg Epstein 🩸🦷 (@gregmepstein) February 16, 2020

Others joined in:

This eugenics crap is so dangerous. In the US it lead to forced sterilizations of women in the South — sometimes against their wills, often without their knowledge — that became so common that they came to be referred to as “Mississippi appendectomies.” https://t.co/TKFQGFc0dL

— Charles M. Blow (@CharlesMBlow) February 16, 2020

While Richard Dawkins is a noted biologist, his science on eugenics is bad. We turned magnificent wolves into pure breed dogs with severe genetic defects causing joint and heart problems and cancer. In fact, many Cavalier spaniels develop mitral valve and neurological disorders.

— Eugene Gu, MD (@eugenegu) February 16, 2020

I have literally never seen an argument against eugenics that hinges on the idea of whether or not it "would work." The issue is what would it mean to say that eugenics "works," which you conveniently have not defined. Care to elaborate on what a "working" model of eugenics is?

— Rani Sadbutt Baker (@destroyed4com4t) February 16, 2020

You absolute pin-headed simpleton. It doesn't work in practice because too many of the goals turn out to be arbitrary fantasies, and too many of those fantasies are the pet projects of abusive bigots who fuck up any civilization they get their hands on. Are you new here? Christ.

— Scott Lynch (@scottlynch78) February 16, 2020

what does 'work' mean, richard

— Shaun (@shaun_vids) February 16, 2020

You're gonna start talking about 'useless eaters' next. We see you.

— Mike Stuchbery 💀🍷 (@MikeStuchbery_) February 16, 2020

yes, facts ignore ideology, except in this instance because your definition of “works” would necessarily be influenced *by ideology*

— Avery Edison (@aedison) February 16, 2020

This is racist trash, Richard. The analogy you draw here between the ideology of eugenics and the domestication of cows or horses is false, dangerous, and historically illiterate.

— Dan Hicks (@profdanhicks) February 16, 2020

Science & Tech

I’m Sure This is Nothing to Worry About

Sure it’ll be fine.

Published

2 weeks ago

13 June, 2022

Paul Joseph Watson

Should it concern us that the plot of Ex Machina could literally be playing out deep within the bowels of Google’s headquarters?

I’m sure this is nothing to worry about.

Please share this video! https://youtu.be/5OnmRyEAOwI

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

———————————————————————————————————————

Science & Tech

AI Expert Says Parents Will Choose ‘Digital Babies’ in the Metaverse Over Real Ones Within 50 Years

In the name of saving the planet.

Published

3 weeks ago

1 June, 2022

Paul Joseph Watson

SEBASTIAN KAULITZKI/SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY via Getty Images

An expert on artificial intelligence says that within 50 years, parents will opt to have “digital offspring” that only exist in the metaverse due to concerns over the environment and overpopulation.

The prediction was made by Catriona Campbell, who is described as “one of the UK’s leading authorities on artificial intelligence.”

According to Campbell, parents will decide to have digital babies, an updated version of Japanese Tamagotchi digital pet toys, for the same reasons they are already choosing not to have real babies, namely, “concerns about the environment, overpopulation, the rising cost of bringing up a child.”

“Campbell predicts they will be commonplace and embraced by society within half a century,” reports left-wing newspaper the Guardian.

The AI expert says the cyberspace babies will eventually be indistinguishable from the real thing and that if parents get bored of them, they can just cancel them like they would a monthly Netflix subscription.

“Campbell says virtual children will look like you, and you will be able to play with and cuddle them. They will be capable of simulated emotional responses as well as speech, which will range from “googoo gaga” to backchat, as they grow older,” reports the newspaper.

#GreatReset: According to an expert on artificial intelligence, would-be parents will soon be able to opt for cheap and cuddle-able digital offspring. https://t.co/WYBjRnkkoU

— Geopolitics & Empire (@Geopolitics_Emp) May 31, 2022

The article also says concerns that the digital babies would just be ‘creepy dystopian dolls’ that can be turned on and off are “old fashioned.”

“Think of the advantages: minimal cost and environmental impact. And less worry,” it adds.

As ever, this is just more anti-natal propaganda, predominantly targeting white western countries, which are already seeing birth rates rapidly decline.

There is an entire cottage industry of social engineering based on convincing westerners not to have children.

As we previously highlighted, in 2020, CNN marked Valentines Day weekend by promoting “the benefits of being single,” even as birth rates across America and Europe continue to plunge.

America’s fertility rate currently stands at 1.8 births per woman.

From 2007 to 2011 the fertility rate in the U.S. declined 9% in the space of just 4 years.

In 2016, the U.S. fertility rate fell to 59.8 births per 1,000 women, the lowest since records began.

Fears about “overpopulation” are also a contrived myth given that plummeting population levels are far more likely to be a bigger problem in 50 years time.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

———————————————————————————————————————

Science & Tech

Australian Primary School Sees “Microchips in Student’s Brains” in 10 Years

School deleted newsletter containing creepy prophecy, but the Internet never forgets.

Published

3 weeks ago

1 June, 2022

Paul Joseph Watson

KTSDesign/SCIENCEPHOTOLIBRARY via Getty Images

An Australian primary school predicted “microchips in student’s brains” within 10 years before subsequently deleting the newsletter that contained the creepy prophecy.

The bizarre entry was featured in the May 26 edition of the Preston West Primary school’s newsletter, which listed a number of prosaic things the school envisages will be helpful to educating children in a decade.

They include “more mental health awareness,” “more buildings and development,” as well as “technological advances for teachers and students.”

However, also included on this list is “microchips in student’s brains to promote intelligence and memory.”

null

Although the newsletter was deleted by the school (it appears all their newsletters have been wiped), proof it was originally posted can be seen via the Google search cache below.

null

As we have previously highlighted, implantable microchips are moving closer to becoming commonplace, particularly as countries embrace the digital ID and a cashless society.

The BBC recently reported on people getting implanted with microchips in their arms in order to make purchases in a more convenient way.

We also highlighted how people in Sweden are willingly having COVID vaccine passports placed onto implantable microchips in their hands.

Cartoon villain and World Economic Forum chief Klaus Schwab wrote in his book ‘The Great Reset’ that the fourth industrial revolution would “lead to a fusion of our physical, digital and biological identity,” which in his book he clarifies is implantable microchips that can read your thoughts.

During last week’s Davos meeting of global elitists, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla explained to Schwab how soon there would be “ingestible pills” – a pill with a tiny microchip chip that would send a wireless signal to relevant authorities when the pharmaceutical has been consumed.

“Imagine the compliance,” said Bourla.

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla explains Pfizer's new tech to Davos crowd: "ingestible pills" – a pill with a tiny chip that send a wireless signal to relevant authorities when the pharmaceutical has been digested. "Imagine the compliance," he says pic.twitter.com/uYapKJGDJx

— Jeremy Loffredo (@loffredojeremy) May 20, 2022

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

———————————————————————————————————————