7- NANITES
0ne of the questions once raised about the mark [of the beast]
was vaccines containing nanites, starting in the 1950s children were vaccinated
usually leaving a scar at the vaccination site.
= a mark.
This video describes how we are all pre-programmed by nanites in our dna.
[n]ow some will say that nanite tech is not advanced enough yet
but 1 always say that the tech the public is aware of and what exists in secret
is like night and day.
22 comments
That "scar at the vaccination site" was the smallpox scratch, which was given between the late Eighteenth Century and the mid-Twentieth. It was given only to hospital workers by 1970, and a few years later ceased to be given at all. I have three of those scratch marks, from 1943, 1968, and 1974, the first given when I was born, the second when I went abroad, and the last, when I worked Jackson Memorial Psych. The following year, if memory serves me, the last known smallpox case in the world was cured, and no one born after 1980 has those "nanite marks". This would be a curious state of affairs, given that nanotechnology took place since then. Of course, this guy will say it's because they've become so much more clever at concealing the injections...
"but 1 always say that the tech the public is aware of and what exists in secret
is like night and day."
Yes, because this super-duper secret technology, so secret that the general public has been kept ignorant of its existence for more than fifty years, is intimately known and understood by you, random internet person #45, 883, 002.
Seems legit.
@Brendan Rizzo
People all over the world confuse fantasy with reality and call it religion. It is hardly an isolated phenomenon.
Nanites did not exist in the 1950's. And if everyone has been programmed, why is there no evidence of it in anyone's behavior? You said "we all", so if you are including yourself and you have been programmed, why are you able to post this?
@Brendan Rizzo
Yes they are, in theory, but not in the 1950's. And if they (or secret microchips, for that matter) were injected into a body, they'd likely be attacked by the immune system or broken down by the body's chemistry.
@Brendan Rizzo
1. I suggest you learn more about nanotechnology, its applications, and its potential before making such sweeping statements.
2. You have no evidence this person is American. Also, the more you learn about real life nanotechnology the more you'll discover that there is major university funded research on the topic. Remember, in the 1950s it was science fiction to have a portable telephone?
3. It is quite possible that this person is in fact mentally ill. After all, paranoid schizophrenics have complained about being implanted with and controlled with radio devices, vacuum tubes, transistors, microchips, RFID, and nanotechnology for a long time.
This theory fails because, even if there were nanites small enough to "live in our dna" (which there aren't), dna is only one factor in explaining behaviour. It is the interaction of dna and environment (both physical and social) which gives rise to behaviour.
Also, genes are not fricking Lego bricks.
In the 1950's? Are you serious? Back then a computer took up an entire warehouse, so I think it's a stretch to say that microchip technology existed then.
1 always say that the tech the public is aware of and what exists in secret
is like night and day.
Ah, that's it, isn't it? To get around this flaw in your conspiracy theory, you claim that the super secret government technology is far more advanced. Well if it's so secret, how come you know about it?
@jsonitsac
The first portable phone (prohibitively huge and expensive as it was) was designed in the 1930's and was first used in the 1940's as a car phone.
Your point is valid, though. I'm just a bit of a pedant on some topics.
Mind you, the more elaborate nanomachines shown in popular media are indeed impossible (I die a little bit inside whenever a Scientific American article shows some concept art of a little shiny robot fiddling around with a protein). But devices that exist and work on the nano scale are theoretically possible. Techniques are constantly being developed to produce molecule-sized gears, engines, manipulators, and other things that can actually work at those sizes.
But the things that i2i describes are outside of the capabilities of modern technology. Nanotechnology as a concept didn't even exist until 1959 and the first practical use of it wasn't developed until the 1980's. The quantum mechanical principles that made it possible then were still too new for people to apply them to anything until then.
So, yeah. In conclusion, i2i is nuts and I really need to stop being such a science fanboy.
Nanites
I've heard of those, in Evolution , the first episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation , season 3.
You should ask Dr. Crusher about these vaccines.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.