Deadly Thoughts Mind reading troops
Posted 13 April 2012 - 05:04 AM
This is not from the Sunday Times ( as there is a subscriber-only blanking system on copying articles, it comes from another internet web-source).
Telepathy and war, the application of mental power to carry out psychological warfare and gather intelligence, has been the stuff of science fiction and allocated to the realm of conspiracy theory for decades. Evidence was published on May 14, 2009, that the Pentagon has been conducting, and plans to continue, research into telepathy. According to information released by the National Research Council and the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon intends to use telepathy on the battlefield and also to intercept and influence 'enemy' commands. Online publication Wired reported that:
"Last year, the National Research Council and the Defense Intelligence Agency released a report suggesting that neuroscience might also be useful to 'make the enemy obey our commands.'"
Wired reported that research is being conducted via a Pentagon division known as Darpa, with a budget for the fiscal year 2009 to 2010 of $4 million. The program has been named 'Silent Talk' and is connected to research at the University of California - funded another $4 million last year. The article states that the University of California has been funded by the army to investigate 'computer-mediated telepathy'. Katie Drummond and Noah Shachtman, for wired, wrote :
"Before being vocalized, speech exists as word-specific neural signals in the mind. Darpa wants to develop technology that would detect these signals of 'pre-speech,' analyze them, and then transmit the statement to an intended interlocutor. Darpa plans to use EEG to read the brain waves."
"Since 2000, Darpa, the Pentagonís blue-sky research arm, has spearheaded a far-flung, nearly $70 million effort to build prototype cockpits, missile control stations and infantry trainers that can sense whatís occupying their operatorsí attention, and adjust how they present information, accordingly."
The Sunday Times reporter in Los Angeles writes that a force of "telepathic troops", each wearing a specialised helmet containing 128 "gel-soaked" electrodes (which constantly sit in readiness to "read" special commands generated by the soldier`s brain and these commands as such have to be pre-learned because they are from a "common vocabulary" developed before-hand), can communicate emergency signals to each other - giving of information regarding ambushes, required med-evacuations, or even for flanking help against the enemy.
Apparently the Stars and Stripes ran an article after it had asked soldiers if they wanted to become "wired supersoldiers" and the vast majority had said that if it helped their chances of survival on the battlefield, they were ready to use any gear. One soldier stated "if it means I dont have to listen to my seargent`s voice one more day, then bring it on.
In regards to the "enemy obeying our commands" one professor, P.R.Wolpe (bio-ethics at Emory University Atlanta) warned that the brain must remain a realm of absolute privacy. "If the right to privacy means anything, it means the right to the contents of my thoughts".
Though Aviation "sources" have said that the technology could be built into fighter pilots helmets to speed up response times to threats from incoming missiles.
Question - to FJB, DO and IMike. (non-combatants -please feel free to comment)
assuming the studies and research comes to fruition would this be of value in combat, in soldiers helmets ?
should prof Wolpe`s warning be up-held, even if this technology is devised to control the minds of the enemy - to lay down their arms, presumably ?
Posted 13 April 2012 - 04:19 PM
As to esp... okay, it exists, to a certain extent. the evidence is clear and overwhelming. My wie is a perfect example: Having not called her family in weeks, she suddenly had the urge to call, later than usual at night, to find that the emts were working on her father, who had just minutes before suffered a fatal aneurysm. This is so common that I'll bet almost all of us have either had or have credibly heard of smiliar experiences.
But that's long way from what they'r talking about here. For one thing, the esp is completely unpredicatable and uncontrollable --no one can will himself to have that experience. For another, it offers no useful detail; when she called, she had no idea of what was taking place.
As to the gadgets... (sigh), yet again the pentagon seems hellbent on replacing the soldier with technology. Hasn't worked yet and probably never will.
And Paul, I disagree with you violently. Are you REALLY sure you want to know what your wife thinks of you?
Posted 15 April 2012 - 12:28 AM
Or -- even more dangerously, do you want to know what she really thinks of you???
Frank, I agree that ESP is normally unpredictable and unspecific, I expect speech was similarly unspecific several million years ago. Within the scope of ESP is the "somebody's looking at me" feeling that multitudes have reported -- and is demonstrable. If you don't believe me, drop by where young people gather. There, sooner or later, you will find a young lady sitting down, fully engaged in conversation with one or more people, who is showing a significant amoung of very attractive thigh. Look at that thigh (Oh the sacrifices we make in the name of science!) and soon, without looking around, she will tug her skirt down to cover as much of that thigh as she can. We know that vision is entirely passive -- the eye collects light and transmits it to the brain as images -- but SOMETHNG told her that someone was ogling her leg.
Our intelligence agencies employed a number of psychics for remote viewing -- identifying persons and things psychically, from the comfort of whatever compound they may have been in. Reportedly, one person was awarded a Legion of Merit for the results of his remote viewing. The program was later canceled, with the report that it produced no exploitable information, but the award implies something different, Remote Viewing
At this point we don't know what our minds are capable of accomplishing. We don't have any methodology for training minds (unless ninjas are more than just the basis for Lamont Cranston) to accomplish the things that minds seem to do of their own accord. But what will result if we develop such methodology is an interesting field of speculation.
As for "The mind must remain private," that is the same sort of wishful political correctness as "we must abolish nuclear weapons." The powers of the mind will be limited only by their own extent, not by any artificial barriers errected in the name of human rights, or even human decency.
Posted 15 April 2012 - 10:49 AM
Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:14 AM
I'm surprised that after all these years you haven't learned that women have no trouble saying what they really think about their husbands. I can take the insults. It's when she's pondering standing over you with a pillow or knife while you're sleeping that I'd want to know about.
Posted 17 April 2012 - 05:07 PM
Okay, that one launched me right on to the floor with laughter. When my wife asked what I was laughing at, I just harumphed and told her she wouldn't be interested. Am already paying for it.
This post has been edited by maddevon: 17 April 2012 - 05:07 PM
Posted 19 April 2012 - 10:13 AM
(an old man shaking his head) You guys are so naive... take it as a given that our wives are hostile in every way --that's human nature. But it's the depths they will sink to in this endless war that are unnerving. Once, by a misfortune too wretched to recount, I ended up at a restaurant table with my wife and three of her married friends. I was ignored for the whole time, as they talked among themselves of their marriages, their husbands, and more specifically, what they did to them. I tell you, my blood ran cold.
One, a sweet-faced mother of three, recounted how she routinely spit on her husband's food before she brought it to the table. Another boasted that she'd perfected the technique of lining his jockey shorts with a common cream that causes extreme heat; the trick, she explained, is to apply the cream when the ubderwear is fresh from the dryer, so that it drys and isn't noticeable until the man's natural sweat activates it. Think of it. This is diabolical. The third admitted --no; boasted-- that when she was angry with her man, she'd take in his pants that he wore to work, scoring a domestic double: It caused him real discomfort during the day, and it also trciked him into thinking he was gaining weight. Seriously; this is demonic. Mere death is a bagatelle compared to this.
So I ask again, are you sure you want to know about this? I've had screaming fits ever since, and I'm accounted a brave man.
By the way, the three belatedly realized that I was there at the end of the meal and openly discussed the necessity of killing me so their secrets would remain hidden, but my wife assured them that, in our entire marriage, I had never listened to a word she'd said and saw no reason why I would start now.
A knife and a pillow... nothing. A prank. But this stuff...
Posted 19 April 2012 - 12:55 PM