The Great Filter

Only time will tell if we all fall off the edge of the earth or if we soar into outer space and live happily ever after.

One-time or recurring donations can now be made at Ko-Fi

I’m guessing my readers have heard of the Great Reset by now. But what about the Great Filter?

The Great Filter is a possible solution for the Fermi paradox. Okay, so, what’s the Fermi paradox?

The apparent conflict between the fact that humans have found no evidence of intelligent extraterrestrial life despite the probability that it exists, given what we know about the universe.

“What we know about the universe”, they say, as if they know a lot? That’s a funny one, since, as I point out in my previous essay, The New World Religion of Transhumanism:

In our galaxy, the Milky Way, there are 400 billion stars that we know of. There are about 2 trillion galaxies in the observable universe. So, there could be—who knows how many more? That means that presently we are aware of 2 trillionth of one 400 billionth of the solar system.

And yet scientists would have us believe they “know a lot.” Well, they claim to know a lot about a lot of things. But their so-called knowledge is often based on stories made up in a scientist’s mind—or a funder’s mind, who stands to earn billions off of related products if the story proves to be “true”. The scientist then sets out to prove the story with all the enthusiasm of a religious zealot.

Okay, so, “Fermi paradox” was coined in the 1950s when physicist and Nobel laureate Enrico Fermi asked the question: “Where are they?” With 400 billion stars in our galaxy alone, surely some of them must have planets that can sustain life as ours does.

If this is so, how do we explain that we have never encountered other life forms? True, there are always new revelations. Like the recent declassification of UFO sightings by the Navy, which shows “mysterious, wingless aircraft traveling at hypersonic speeds, with no visible means of propulsion”.

And then there are all the individuals who sincerely believe they have been abducted by aliens. In a recent HuffPo/YouGov poll, 48% of Americans believed it's possible that UFOs have visited and observed our planet. According to Business Insider, 10% of the U.S. population say they have seen an alien space craft with their own eyes.

I distinctly remember as a child, a good friend of my parents excitedly telling them that he and his friend had been traveling on a lonely country road when an alien spacecraft descended right in front of them, and they barely escaped abduction. This was an honest guy, and my parents had no reason to doubt what he was saying.

Still, how could we be sure he was telling the truth?

How do we know these stories aren’t just the result of our desire that what we believe should be true? How do we know the powers-that-be aren’t playing tricks on us because they can manipulate us psychologically?

We don’t know. Just like we don’t know if any of the theories our scientists make up are true. We laugh now at the idea that the earth is flat. But there was a time when people genuinely believed this to be true. Experts that they looked up to told them so. Besides, all you had to do was look at the horizon across the sea. Your eyes couldn’t deceive you.

It used to be said, “I’ll believe it when I see it.” But now we know that we see very little of what is really there, and our eyes deceive us all the time.

Dark Matter is a perfect example of this. It’s the “mysterious stuff that fills the universe, but no one has ever seen it.”

Dark matter is distributed in the universe in a net-like pattern (Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech)

Scientists will tell you that 80% of all matter in the universe consists of material that no one has ever seen. Scientists call it Dark Matter. They assume it exists because without it, the behavior of stars, planets and galaxies wouldn't make sense.

Without Dark Matter, something they made up, the behavior of stars, planets and galaxies wouldn't make sense? How absurdly arrogant of them. The behavior of the stars, planets and galaxies DO make sense. The fact that they do, is not dependent on whether or not some humans with an elevated sense of their own importance, decide to come up with a theory and give it a name.

And guess what? Recently, an international team of scientists has found new evidence that perhaps dark matter doesn’t really exist after all. In research published in the Astrophysical Journal, they even suggest that their new theory will mean we have an incomplete scientific understanding of gravity.

What? Surely gravity is sacrosanct.

Keeping all of this in mind, let’s get back to the idea of the Great Filter. Life is out there because it has to be, based on our experts’ ‘knowledge’. We just haven’t found it yet. Therefore, we must come up with a theory called the Great Filter to explain it:

“Somewhere along the evolutionary path a barrier to development arises that makes detectable extraterrestrial life exceedingly rare”.

Everything at this point in the progress of our species is now turning toward altering ourselves so that we can live longer and survive in space.

There are 9 steps in an "evolutionary path" that results in the colonization of the observable universe:

1. The right star system (including organics and potentially habitable planets)

2. Reproductive molecules (e.g. RNA)

3. Simple (prokaryotic) single-cell life

4. Complex (eukaryotic) single-cell life

5. Sexual reproduction

6. Multi-cell life

7. Tool-using animals with intelligence

8. A civilization advancing toward the potential for a colonization explosion (where we are now)

9. Colonization explosion of space

Coming up with these nine steps was easy enough. We’ve been telling ourselves this story of evolution for a long time. Scientists look at “evolution” of our species and have concluded, great, we’ve made it as far as number nine!

However, there is a good chance the Great Filter will stop us from reaching our goal of colonizing space.

Natural disasters that could bring about the Great Filter, like asteroids hitting earth or the sun eventually burning out. But those are long shots—the sun won’t burn out for another 7 to 8 billion years.

It’s more likely that (irony of all ironies) the very advancements that we hope will make space exploration possible are the very advancements that threaten to destroy us.

Nuclear war, pandemics, pathogens, artificial intelligence, climate change, are all results of human advancements. I say climate change because make no mistake, if they keep on messing with the weather, if they keep on sending more and more rockets into space, what they call climate change now will be nothing compared to the nightmare they will create.

The more we mess with our beautiful, perfectly balanced planet, the more likely it is that we will destroy ourselves in the process. No, we won’t destroy Earth. Even if it takes 5 million years, the earth will recover from our stupidity. We will be gone forever.

Professor Ron Milo’s laboratory conducted a study comparing human-made mass – aka anthropogenic mass – with all the living mass, or biomass, on the globe. They found that each person on the globe now produces more anthropogenic mass than his or her bodyweight every week.

Our species is creating so much material that it encroaches on the space of other creatures (Credit: Munir Uz Zaman/AFP/Getty Images)

We are told repeatedly by our brightest minds that “Our survival depends on living long enough to either preserve and care for our planet into the far future or to successfully move onto other planets and thrive there.”

This is a despicable viewpoint, as if it can only be one or the other. If the choice is between caring for our planet and colonizing space, we know which one they will choose. They are quite willing to use up every resource on earth to reach that goal. They are quite willing to harvest organs, abort babies, experiment with drugs and vaccines, infect humans with pathogens, implant microchips and genetically alter and synthesize us just to see what will happen, if it means achieving longevity for themselves and the ability to survive in space. The end always justifies the means for the uber smart and rich—although the smart part is debatable.

In this context, it becomes clear why the obsession with cloning, chimeras, unlocking the secrets of DNA, genetic engineering, the obsession with growing babies in artificial wombs, the push to get humans to think of themselves not as humans at all, but as anything that can be artificially altered. Part animal? Let’s try it. Part machine? Sounds like a good idea. Abandoning the body altogether and living in the cloud? It’s worth a try.

It also explains how it was so easy to transition from humans being sacred to being a commodity for sale.

They say artificial wombs would help infertile women, it would keep babies safe from disease, and end the worry of premature birth. But what it really means is that it would further the goal of a select group of elites becoming the creators of synthetic life; of finding ways to create life and control the process so that they can create a new race of space travelers.

Globally, assisted reproductive technologies, including in Vitro fertilization, is estimated to be worth $25 billion and is predicted to grow to $41 billion by 2026. All of these procedures finance the higher goal of defeating the Great Filter and getting off this planet before it’s too late.

A Scientific America article suggests we should make genetically identical copies of ourselves and “the flora and fauna we hold dear and spread these copies to other stars in order to avoid the risk of annihilation from a single-point catastrophe.”

The process of spreading multiple copies of our genetic material is compared to the revolution brought about by the printing press. Before printing, each copy of the Bible was lovingly created by hand and therefore was unique. Mass production meant that “a single copy lost its value as a precious entity.”

In the same way, as we “progress’ to cloning ourselves, our unique selves become irrelevant. Creating synthetic copies of everything, producing synthetic life in our laboratories, it is suggested that we could go so far as producing “Gutenberg-DNA printers” that could “make copies of the human genome out of the raw materials on the surface of other planets so that any one copy would not be essential for preserving the information.”

You are not important. In fact, you cease to exist as something apart from the whole. Just like a toe is one small part of a body and is useless on its own, you are useless unless you are part of the vast machine and contributing to it.

Yes, the brightest among us are working feverishly on making this happen.

They no more understand what they are talking about when they speak of the “Origins of Life” than they do what they speak about Dark Matter.

They cannot create life from nothing. But what they actually do is make synthetic copies. The copy can never be as good as the original. Flawed scientists with their petty competitions and jealousies, their willingness to compromise integrity for money, and—let’s face it—their own limited intelligences, cannot possibly find the answers to infinite questions. All they can do is create a bigger and bigger mess, fulfilling their own fears of self-destruction.

If any of their theories has merit, it’s the Great Filter.

In our struggle to create life, in our struggle to transcend our humanity and gain immortality; in our struggle to escape the mess we’ve made in the process of trying to recreate ourselves, we only succeed in destroying everything.

When we understand that this is the mentality behind what the elite are working towards—this escaping the mess that they have made before it destroys them, knowing that the only hope they have in escaping it is to make an even bigger mess along the way—everything becomes clear.

This is why they are so intent that we stop thinking of ourselves as individuals. This is why we must now make the transition to the New World Order rather than individual countries. The individual can no longer exists on any earthly level. It must be destroyed. In its place must be the noble calling of the species to “save itself.”

Each one of us, all of the billions of disposable vessels made of flesh and blood and cells, exist to feed this goal. The petri dish we now live in is a place where we are all once again swimming in a primordial soup, just like they say it was in the beginning.

The Primordial Soup Theory is another one of those convenient theories that suggests that “3.8 billion to 3.55 billion years ago life began in a pond or ocean as a result of the combination of chemicals from the atmosphere and some form of energy to make amino acids, the building blocks of proteins, which would then evolve into the first species on Earth.”

When life is reduced to this level—something in a dish that evolves by chance with no purpose, then you can justify looking at the vast majority of humans as lower life forms who, for the sake of preserving the species, must become a new kind of primordial soup, there for the purpose of moving humanity on to the next level of building "an artificial world" beyond our earth.

We will find this mentality gaining more and more acceptance in the next few years. It is the only way for these elites to achieve their goals—by convincing ordinary citizens to go along with their madness.

A perfect example is told in this article The International Society of Nonbinary Scientists is Making Its Own Rules.

I am a big supporter of gay and lesbian rights. This has nothing to do with that. This has to do with convincing people that they can be anything so that they will end up being nothing. It is another way to destroy individualism and I’ve talked about it in other essays, so I won’t go into it here.

Dr. Jost Migenda, a postdoc research associate studying astroparticle physics, believes nonbinary scientists contribute something valuable to their fields:

‘They’ point to a speech by recent Nobel Prize winner Carolyn Bertozzi in which she argued her lab’s diversity empowered them to question established thinking. “That’s something that we, as nonbinary people, tend to be good at. Just having disregard for stupid rules that really shouldn’t apply,” Migenda laughs. “Even if your research is completely unrelated to gender or sexuality, this healthy disregard for the rules and thinking in different ways can be really helpful in any area of science.”

I’m all for thinking outside the box, but again, this isn’t about free thought. In fact, the further we go down this road, the more restricted we will be in what we are allowed to think.

It’s all working out perfectly for the elite, such as Jeff Bezos.

Even as Amazon workers were ‘forced to go back to work’ after a fellow employee died on shift, Jeff Bezos (and others like him) invest the money he gets from exploiting his workers into the dual goals of space colonization and longevity.

Bezos is funding Altos Labs, an “Age Reversal” Startup, “dedicated to reversing the aging process through the fine art of something scientists call biological reprogramming.”

I’ve mentioned Altos before and it’s time for a reminder. The company is luring the best and the brightest young people fresh out of university, with million-dollar salaries. So far, they’ve been working on rejuvenating animals.

Rejuvenate Bio, a small biotech company claims it has used reprogramming to rejuvenate old mice and extend their lives.

With a $3 billion initial commitment for the launch of Altos Laboratories— likely the world record startup financing—a Forbes article begs the question of whether such excess will push the quest for immortality to “new heights or off a cliff?”

And with this we’re back to the Great Filter. The theory that most makes sense out of all of the wild ones our brilliant scientists have come up with so far.

Only time will tell if we all fall off the edge of the earth or if we soar into outer space and live happily ever after.