"We’ll have ‘virtual’ babies within 50 years", AI expert predicts


While some mothers are encouraged to abort their babies, others cannot have children. We now have studies showing that the earth's population is declining. While the studies say that the population won't start falling for a few decades, we must realize that to know this means that we are already in a slowdown and decline. 

Meanwhile, the worshipers of Scientism want us to think we don't need children; we can pretend. Take a look at this article from the New York Post.

"In the not-so-distant future, those looking to expand their families may opt to do so with the help of artificial intelligence.

"The average American child costs parents more than $230,000 by the time they reach the age of 17, according to the US Department of Agriculture.

"A digital kid, on the other hand, could have all its needs met for less than $25 per month — that's just about $5,100 by the time they reach high school graduation — according to the UK's leading artificial intelligence expert."

Children are expensive so let's have virtual ones? This would be funny if it weren't a fundamental goal of the World Economic Forum. This is transhumanism at its finest.

"Virtual children," some experts believe, could supplant real ones — becoming commonplace by the early-2070s, Campbell told South West News Service. By combining computer-generated imagery with machines that can learn as humans do, virtual children that look like real ones would be able to recognize and respond to their parents, and simulate real emotional responses as kids do.

'"Virtual children may seem like a giant leap from where we are now, but within 50 years technology will have advanced to such an extent that babies which exist in the metaverse are indistinct from those in the real world," added Campbell, whose new book, "AI by Design: A Plan For Living With Artificial Intelligence," is out this week."

It looks like Hollywood has been telling us for decades what the plan is for humanity's future.


  • As technocracy and transhumanism have risen to the fore, they have brought with them their own form of science — "scientism" — which is basically the religion of science. In other words, it's a belief even in the absence of evidence, or in the face of contrary evidence, and this is a very serious problem
  • The clearest problem with the admonition to "believe the science" is that bona fide experts are found on all sides of any given empirical question
  • The scientific priesthood is intolerant to new ideas while, simultaneously, search engines and digitization of scientific literature have eroded their authority as gatekeepers of knowledge
  • The way things look right now, the gatekeepers to the scientific priesthood don't seem to have any intention to open its doors to outsiders and independent thinkers. If anything, they're trying to massively increase their control over the information we're allowed to see and share, even to the point of proposing the creation of certifying boards to police physicians' sharing of medical opinions
  • The idea that a group of people can be the sole arbiters of "truth" is irrational. Individual biases always creep in, and the greater the influence of such a group, the more ingrained and dogmatic those biases will become, until the system is corrupted to the core. One could argue that dogmatic faith in nonexistent scientific consensuses is the reason for why we are where we are today


MyRR Arsenal: A mighty tide has begun, people are coming to RRM for many reasons, including a censorship-free safe haven for their content--and best of all, it's free!
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.

Be the first to comment.

You must login to post a comment.

By accepting you will be accessing a service provided by a third-party external to https://rubyraymedia.com/