The cult of “science” has a fetish for trying to amalgamate humanity with machine. And its latest endeavor in this pursuit has taken the form of an emerging brain implant technology that would render humans part flesh, part computer.
Researchers from the University of California, Berkeley (UCB), have come up with a concept they’ve dubbed “neural dust” that they say can be implanted into people’s brains for data collection purposes. And the technology is reportedly so small that humans wouldn’t even know it was inside their heads.
Using a special wire apparatus, the neural dust can be “dipped” into a person’s cerebral cortex, report scientists, where it would remain embedded indefinitely. And since it’s powered by special piezoelectric materials, this dust wouldn’t require a recharge, which means once it’s there, it’s there for good.
According to reports, this neural dust contains a complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) that allows it to monitor and track a person’s brain activity. After gathering this data, the dust then transmits it to a special transmitter installed on a person’s scalp.
Here’s how The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) describes the technology:
“Thousands of biologically neutral microsensors, on the order of one-tenth of a millimeter (approximately the thickness of a human hair), would convert electrical signals into ultrasound that could be read outside the brain.”
Government-funded implantable brain chips will read, control people’s thoughts
So what’s the purpose of such invasive technology? The team that came up with the idea claims neural dust could be used to treat chronic diseases and “severe disabilities” with greater ease. This is often the excuse linked to human-machine alchemy projects — it’s to help people!
On the flip side, microscopic cranial implants offer a way for nefarious entities to literally enter the minds of humans, perhaps undetected, and track their thoughts and behaviors. This is a much more likely scenario — a type of “Mark of the Beast” for one’s brain that could even allow governments to control people’s minds.
Before relegating all this to the conspiracy theory dustbin, consider the fact that the American military has openly admitted to funding brain-computer projects capable of controlling people’s thoughts and emotions. And none other than Jose Carmena, a professor from UCB, who also worked on the neural dust project, helped lead the project.
To the tune of $70 million, the U.S. military funded research into implantable electrodes that could be installed into people’s brains to both read and control their emotions. And once again, the reasoning was to help “mentally ill people” recover from their demons and addictions.
“Imagine if I have an addiction to alcohol and I have a craving,” stated Carmena to MIT Technology Review. “We could detect that feeling and then stimulate inside the brain to stop it from happening.”
Obama’s “BRAIN Initiative” pushes government mind-control agenda
Both projects fall in line with the Obama regime’s “BRAIN Initiative,” a so-called “brain-mapping” program being actively funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The program is being branded as a “support” system for injured veterans and war fighters, but others recognize it as an attempt at totalitarian mind-control.
“Our generation has outlived science fiction,” wrote New York Times (NYT) columnist William Safire back in 2002, warning even back then about the dangers of this emerging technology.
“Just as we have anti-depressants today to elevate mood, tomorrow we can expect a kind of Botox for the brain to smooth out wrinkled temperaments, to turn shy people into extroverts, or to bestow a sense of humor on a born grouch. But what price will human nature pay for these nonhuman artifices? What does the flattening of people’s physical and mental differences, accompanied by a forced fitting of mental misfits, do to the diversity of personality that makes interpersonal dynamics so fascinating?”
Sources for this article include: