Debunked: FunVax, Pentagon Briefing on Removing the God Gene [Hoax]

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
This is interesting, a video interview of the supposed "FunVax Scientist" (the guy with the DNA tie)

(Not Dean Hamer, who is a real person who popularized the "God Gene" idea).

Rather odd that they could get in contact with the scientist, ask him about his super secret world-shattering work, and post it on YouTube, but not get his name.

 
Last edited:

Bill

Senior Member
This is interesting, a video interview of the supposed "FunVax Scientist" (the guy with the DNA tie)

(Not Dean Hamer, who is a real person who popularized the "God Gene" idea).

Rather odd that they could get in contact with the scientist, ask him about his super secret world-shattering work, and post it on YouTube, but not get his name.
Everyone knows that when you are creating a new super-virus you hide the names of the people involved and not the technical information that would be useful in developing an antivirus.
 
Last edited:

Leighton

New Member
Everyone knows that when you are creating a new super-virus you hide the names of the people involved and not the technical information that would be useful in developing an antivirus.
Hi readers,

The man in the video says:

"so if someone asked me to design a vaccine"

Are you guys stating that he is the guy who developed the vaccine?

He is answering a hypothetical question asked of him: how would he go about the design of a vaccine, such as funvax...

So he is supposed to be an expert answering questions not the funvax scientist......

Am I missing something???


Please explain..

Thanks.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Hi readers,

The man in the video says:

"so if someone asked me to design a vaccine"

Are you guys stating that he is the guy who developed the vaccine?

He is answering a hypothetical question asked of him: how would he go about the design of a vaccine, such as funvax...

So he is supposed to be an expert answering questions not the funvax scientist......

Am I missing something???


Please explain..

Thanks.
He's just an anonymous guy that is being used (knowingly or not) to perpetuate the story.
 

Marin B

Active Member
Someone on YouTube noticed the pictures were similar.

I (Mick) found the matching image using Google.

Seems like this blog is responsible for it:
http://funvax.wordpress.com/

Seems like it started early 2011, and the video was released in June 2011

It spread via youtube, Facebook and the various conspiracy sites.

I'm really impressed that you found the original publication of the brain image. Do you have a program that matches images, or just a lot of patience looking at Google images?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I'm really impressed that you found the original publication of the brain image. Do you have a program that matches images, or just a lot of patience looking at Google images?
I did have to crop a bit of the image, but this is literally all I did, a few seconds.
 

Egu

New Member
I have read the thread, and first I totally believed it was a scam, but then I thought of another possibility: that the fact that the slides are not scientific or fake does not imply that the whole thing did not happen. How about scientist wanting to impress and sell a placebo drug that they know won't work but still the US is wanting to implement it? You see, the fact that the slides are fake... does not mean these are genuine people wanting to make a business off the US administration.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I thought of another possibility: that the fact that the slides are not scientific or fake does not imply that the whole thing did not happen.
Yes it does. Otherwise, you've got people trying to scam the Pentagon using an utterly unbelievable story using fake evidence that's trivially easy to debunk. So that all implies it did not happen, especially as nobody was arrested for fraud.
 

Dan Wilson

Senior Member
How about scientist wanting to impress and sell a placebo drug that they know won't work but still the US is wanting to implement it?
That would be an enormous waste of time and money if they knew it was a placebo but still wanted to sell it. Are you thinking it would still have an effect as a placebo? In that case, the person taking the drug would have to want to be converted from more fanatic to less fanatic, be aware of what the drug is supposed to do, and be aware that they have received it. It would not make any sense to expect a plan like that to work.
 

MaybeOneGrape

New Member
This popped up on twitter again, and forgive me if I'm doing this wrong:

It seems to me that if there is a "god gene," that is to say a gene that, when expressed, produces behavior akin to religious zealotry, that gene would need to be explained as reproductively advantageous. Now, we can get around this by saying 'individuals expressing this gene have a tendency to rape.' That's, frankly, an ugly interpretation of what we're talking about here. Long before social contracts involving religion-based rape, there would have had to have been a physical advantage to being religious. I think pattern recognition meets that criteria. There is, I think, selective pressure to 'believe' a pattern means something.

Now, that is not to say that all patterns are significant. But if there were a gene, a tendency, for an individual to consider a rustle of grass being meaningful, being worthwhile of attention, that might mean survival versus predation. And if it's just the wind, well, no harm no foul. But the ones who ignored the rustle of grass, well, we know what happened to them.

There absolutely is genetic selection pressure, especially during the 200 million years before the emergence of modern humans, to be paranoid, devout, unreasonable conspiracy theorists, because prior performance predicts future success. Jumping at shadows is our bread and butter, friends. It's what got us here.

Now, in the context of this gem here, none of these "top brass" in the audience asked "what are the side effects."
No concern at all. That may have been a selective edit, but if I were in that audience the first question in my mind would have been "Professor, you're talking about a communicable virus which disables the human mind from recognizing patterns. What controls have you instituted that allow you to target ONLY religious extremism, and not regular social interaction? Threat detection. The minutia of facial expression. Sir, have you created the autism virus?"

And then the scientist would be like "gentlemen, I would rather live in a world of Autists, than continue on as such."

"Harrumph harrumph" they would say, but it would be too late, for the virus had already left Logan INTL an hour before.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Now, in the context of this gem here, none of these "top brass" in the audience asked "what are the side effects."
No concern at all.
That's because the entire thing is a hoax, a provocative art project. That's probably just a bunch of Ryan Harper's friends.
 
Top