Predictive Neuroscience: Facts, Fictions, and Fears of Scanning Brains and Reading Minds: Dr. James Giordano 2013 National Science Foundation Lecture:

ETK Notes and Transcription of Lecture:

“Predictive Neuroscience: Facts, Fictions, and Fears of Scanning Brains and Reading Minds” (National Science Foundation, Feb. 9, 2013)

By Dr. James Giordano

ETK Alter Title: “When Science and Scientists Are Coopted (Perverted) to Serve Totalitarian/Utopian Aspirations, False Premises Lead to False (But Useful) Conclusions”

Unstated goal: “Toward a Psycho-Civilized Society” And Total Control of Human Populations

Giordano acknowledges his New York City accent “by way of Bavaria:” Hence, I surmise, he’s probably of German-Jewish descent (Illuminati?).

He acknowledges he enjoys working with SEE (Science and Entertainment Exchange) of the National Academies of Science that works with the Directors Guild of America, providing information to science fiction authors and film writers to help make “predictive programming movies” for Hollywood, etc.

The False Premises (aka “The Set-Up”):

“The call for us to utilize neuro-scientific acumen, techniques and technologies we have, and those perhaps that we may develop, is not necessarily simply generated by the engine of curiosity of science and engineering.”

ETK note: In other words, neuroscience is not pure science it is “applied science.” He does not state who has issued the “call for us to utilize neuro-scientific acumen,” but we may assume it is the US government/intelligence/Pentagon/Corporate Sector and the “called for” applications have to do with controlling minds of the populace.

“There are a few words that I want you to be familiar with throughout this lecture. (ETK note: Giordano lowers his voice ominously).

Words like “9/11,” “terrorism,” “Columbine,” “Oslo,” “Phoenix,” “Aurora, CO,” “Newtowne,” “Sandy Hook, CT.” These are sentinal events that prompt a call from the general public and increasingly from local governments, state governments, and increasingly from national governments, and not only in this country but worldwide, for science and technology to DO SOMETHING. I stand before you as exemplar. After events like this happen, our offices deluge with calls from the media and the public.

(ETK comment: This is a very doubtful claim.)

“Why can’t you as a neuroscientist DO SOMETHING? Why can’t we use the power of the science and technology that we have in our hands to be able to thwart this threat to our public safety, to our children, to our elders, to our populations, writ both small and writ large? Can’t you predict this? And of course, the trajectory that goes along with that is, if you can predict it, can we not then provide viable targets not only for assessment, but for access, targeting and intervention?

(ETK comment: Here gives the solution to his the problem-reaction-solution (or thesis-antithesis-synthesis) Hegelian dialectic that Giordano has set up. The solution he offers is to “provide viable targets not only for assessment, but for access, targeting, and intervention.

This is the “set-up;” or the “con,” and Giordano it seems me, is a consummate actor and conman):

This (probably) German-Jewish (Illuminati?) neuroscientist, again, employs the classic Hegelian dialectic of “problem-reaction-solution” in which the problem (government-sponsored, false-flag, synthetic terror events) was created by government-military-academic-corporate sector (Tavistock Institute, CIA, DIA, professional neuroscientists, etc.). This “problem,” in turn, was engineered to provoke a “reaction” or the appearance of concern and alarm by the public which is then used to justify the “solution” – the Pentagon-intelligence-neuroscience community-corporate-academic-government complex must respond by further “mind controlling of the populace” by using selected targets as guinea pigs. All is justified in the name of protecting the people from future “terrorist events.” )

“The answer there is what can we do, what can’t we do, and what should we do about everything in between.”

What is the mind?

What neuroscience has successfully done is bring these disciplines together (anatomy, the natural sciences, the behavioral sciences, physics, engineering, the social sciences, and increasingly the humanities, philosophy, anthropology, etc.) together to have a deeper understanding of the structure and function of nerves and by extension, the brain, and perhaps this thing that does to create and substantiate this effect, that we know as consciousness, cognition, emotions, actions that we call mind.

And what’s on this screen represents 120 years of representation of what neuroscience has been, from anatomical drawings post-mortem, to the use of increasingly sophisticated imaging devices, to the coupling of imaging devices with those devices that are able to both feed back onto the brain and in some ways not only measure but also control.

…. medicine, and increasingly, national security, defense, and intelligence. Let loose in the pandora’s box of the social millieu.

This brings us back to the urgings of the public with regards to Columbine, Oslo, Phoenix. The question here is can’t you do something? Can’t you figure this out? Perhaps we can use the power of this neuroscientific techniques and technologies to be able to intuit who might be along those particular lines of transcending those boundaries that we have with regard to social normality, social norms, violence and aggressiveness.

Categories of Assessment Technologies

Computerized Tomography (CT)
Positron Emission Tomography (PET)
Single Photon Emission Computerized Tomography (SPECT)
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)
Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)
Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI)
Quantitative Electroencephalography (qEEG)
Magnetoelectroencephalography (MEG)

… At 43:00 minutes:

Individual (point aggregate) data, I can point to where you are now and where you might go. I fit these to Group-Analytic Data, using genomics, phenotypics, aggregate data, using a great computational power which is at our fingertips on the basis of Cloud computing.

Diagram integrates population data, cohort data, individual data.

This allows me to plot, on a Spectrum Effects Diagram, where you are and where you will probably be in the future. There will be a Decisional Threshhold, a tipping point, where you will cross the line and become socially violent and socially aggressive. You’re going to have this disorder, this condition and do these things. Why? Because there is a probabalistic inference based upon these multiple sources of data, that strongly suggest a high correlation of moving in these directions.

On the Spectrum Effects Diagram, the x-axis is “Manifest Severity,” the y-axis is “Spectrum Expression(s) = Genotype + Phenotype +/- Environment and the horizontal dotted line represents the “Decisional Clinical/Social Threshold”

So what are we really doing? Where are we right now? Linking brain states to cognitions and behaviors We are relating what’s going on in the brain, what’s going on in the structures of the brain, how those structures may be normal or abnormal by comparing with large data banks, combining that with an analysis of your behavior, then using that to scan brains and read minds proverbially, and then taking that one step further, we are predicting emotions, cognitions, and behaviors.

Even though scanning brains is not the same as reading minds. Still, we can make predictions…. and describe to the point of prompting interventions.

(ETK comment: Here, it seems that “TIs” provide the testing group for the application of all these processes…. the “interventions” Giordano describes here could well include street theatre, use of nonlethal weapons, and the host of other stalking techniques.)