Published in Keren n°119
Dr. Jean-Pierre Dickès, a former gynecologist and obstetrician, has been heavily involved in transhumanism research for many years. He has never ceased to warn and denounce this dangerous drift, often alas, without being heard.
We met him, after reading his books, he kindly agreed to answer our questions. Here is the summary of this interview which dates from 2019.
Can you briefly introduce yourself?
My parents were doctors, so I turned to medicine. They had a 33-bed delivery clinic in Boulogne sur Mer that was grouped together with a surgical clinic. So initially, I was an obstetrician, which obviously made me touch all questions of medical morality especially with contraception. After that, later, I turned to general medicine. Then, I became interested in all bioethics but from the Christian angle.
Is this what led you to take an interest in questions of transhumanism and all these questions?
Absolutely. Initially I was rather very interested in regionalism, so I am a specialist in Picard.
How did you come to move from regionalism to this question of transhumanism? Did you become aware at any time of the dangers that this philosophy represented and what happened?
Yes of course. I will almost say that it is related. My roots were Christian. I looked for why regionalism was disappearing and I came to a very simple conclusion, which was that the goal was to transform man. When you say "transhumanism," you are going from one humanity to another humanity. I fought a lot against abortion with Professor Lejeune. I even went to the Berger Commission, which dealt with this issue of abortion with Professor Lejeune. I organized the dissemination of the doctors' statement for the respect of life in the north of France with some colleagues. Destroying a life was an abominable thing for me. Whether she was in the micro-dimensions of an embryo or in the old man finishing his life, for me it was exactly the same thing. And I looked for the meaning of that which was precisely dehumanization, the disappearance of the human species and the transition to another type of society and another type of humanity.
Can we say that we are experiencing a real revolution today?
Ah yes, and I will say even more than that, it is an evolution, a revolution, "revolver" that is to say to change things, that's for sure. But this will to change, to make revolutions, it is very old, it is almost as old as the world.
But philosophically, it was very well concretized for example, by the values of the French Revolution where my colleagues like Pinel, Guillotin, Marat claimed to bring a new man. It was a question of transforming humanity already and after that, we found this philosophy for example in Marxism, in Nazism where it was a question of making new men. But the means that were used at that time were undoubtedly completely different from those that are used today and transhumanism is a wolf disguised as a lamb. What for? Because he promises people to cure them of all diseases and he even promises them immortality. So people get dragged in much more easily than when their heads were cut off or shot.
In your book on the end of humanity, you go so far as to say that humanity cannot survive this evolution beyond 3 generations. What would be the main dangers you see?
I had spent my time alerting people to the consequences of abortion. The consequences of abortion we see, the French no longer have children, so it is Islam that settles. I saw all these struggles that I had led, they were struggles that were negative, it was about opposing, but now I have evolved, those who had deceived us have collapsed by themselves. Communism collapsed. Nazism does not talk about it. So I said to myself, "There must be flaws." These flaws, they were obvious, they would obviously be at the level of genetics and above all, at the level of the brain. What for? Genetics is incredibly complex, it is everything that is around the nucleus. We discovered that around the nucleus of the cell passes most of the genetic information, this is called "epigenesis" And we have now realized that these areas ofepigenetics had major information to give us, but it went further, is that epigenesis, it is ourselves who form it. That is, 2 twins who arrive in the world, identical twins, they should be exactly the same and indeed, when they are small, they are the same, but when they grow up, they become different. Well, it's epigenesis and that's the freedom that God has given us, it's the freedom of choice that makes that if we're stressed, if we kill someone, or if we like cakes, and well all that, it's in epigenesis. And epigenesis, before we understand how it works, it will take decades.
That is what you are saying when you say that the artificial uterus is not for tomorrow.
The artificial uterus is another aspect of the thing. I deepened this notion because there were experiments that were underway on ectogenesis, the development of the child outside the maternal womb, it is called (ectogenesis) and there too, we are facing major difficulties. What for? Because from the moment n ° 1 where the embryo is fixed in the uterus, it creates links between the mother and her child and we are at the very small beginning of the knowledge of this.
Earlier we were talking about philosophy that is sub-jascent to transhumanism. We still have the impression that there is a return to the good old materialism of the beginning of the century, the scientism of Auguste Comte and finally this scientistic vision that science is the only possible truth and that therefore, everything outside the field of science is null!
That's right. It was a conception that existed before the revolution. In 1741, a philosopher had made a book called "The Man Machine." For him, man was a machine. These ideas already existed before the French Revolution. Indeed, there is a continuity between the man machine, between positivisms, and then after that, of course, Marxism which is an absolute materialism and Hitler's theories that wanted to change man from genetics by selection which was no longer natural selection. There are also Darwin's theories that are literally collapsing. There are two directions, the first is precisely the epigenesis that makes man create himself, he has his fate in his hands, he is free. There is no natural selection. It's huge, gigantic and evolutionists are on the ground literally, they don't know what to answer. Two evolutionists Stockler and Habler began to study the genome of species. We realized that all around the nucleus, that is to say outside the genetic circuit that we knew, there were mitochondria. What is it? This is the battery, which powers the cell. Thecharacteristic is that they are almost indestructible, that is to say that they allow to go back in time and we have found all around for example in the mummies of the pharaohs. As much as the flesh putsrefies, the nuclei burst, sclerotic and with them we can not do much of the DNA found on mummies. In contrast, mitochondria were very rich in information and mitochondria themselves evolve very, very slowly. They studied and compared 100,000 species of all kinds of animals and amazement, while it was against their own conviction, they realized that all species had arrived at the same time, which corresponds to the genesis account, God creating each species and one after the other. That's the sledgehammer. Evolutionists take a terrible blow to the point that their only reaction is insults. So evolution is now being challenged by epigenesis.
Now, if we go back to the issue of transhumanism, let's say that what is attractive to people is that it brings them promises, as you noted earlier, of benefits in everyday life. But could you also mention the main dangers that this represents?
Transhumanism is the disappearance of the human species. I am not the only one to say it, there are now several people who say it like for example Testar. Testar says that transhumanism leads to the end of the human species. He realized that his discovery corresponded to yawning the door for eugenics to rush. What for? Because with in vitro fertilization we do what is called preimplantation diagnosis that I already talked about in my book 10 years ago and that allows us to select human species and get rid of all those we will not want. Now we know, we kill them when they arrive at birth because they had a cleft palate or a clubfoot. There are countries that are considering allowing children to be killed at birth. It is a return to Nazism, but a more refined, more acceptable Nazism. But at the same time, when we talk about surrogacy, it is the return to slavery. What will be the psychological situation of these children when they grow up? This is a real dehumanization of the human being, an absolutely terrible regression.
How is it that there is this craze for this kind of theory? Aren't there world-class economic or even political interests behind this?
The goal is transhumanism. We call GAFAM: Goggle, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft. Amazon had made in 2016, $ 65 billion in profit. On an article in Le Figaro, a journalist explained that the two A's: Amazon and Apple had made 1000 billion in stock market profit last year. When we put together all the profits of GAFAM, it is 4000 billion and a half. So I went to look at the budget of France, it's 360 billion. That's a chip next to an elephant, and it's these people who lead us and it's these people who lead us to transhumanism. This is the phenomenon associated with the new world order. There would be a world super-class pulling the strings.
There is an organization that is being set up, particularly with Brussels. Brussels is very rooted in this vision. One gets the impression that these people are not themselves free to move, but that they are being manipulated.
It is a caste and the progress of immortality and others, not everyone will benefit, it will be necessary to be eminently rich to be able to benefit from lifelong treatments. Already, Social Security is dragging its feet because it finds that there are too many old people and that the simplest would be to euthanize them. So, those who want to live longer will have to buy and we will move towards a 2-speed or 3-speed humanity with those who lead the world, the financiers who lead the world and then the pedestal, the plebs.
What is the role in this set that currently advocates this famous theory of gender that we are teaching our children even though they say that this is not the case?
It is a direct challenge to God, it is an attack on life, on creation. It is the will to substitute oneself for God. We take ourselves for God, we simply want to suppress the sexes and we will create a new sex, the 3rd sex of Simone de Beauvoir. They say it, they say it, "we are a religion". It's not just an ideology, it's more than that, it's a religion. This is the religion of Satan, an anti-Christ religion. When we look at the acronym of Apple, it is an apple with a tooth stroke It is the snake that stretched the apple and said "come on, you will eat this". This means that we Christians are in a situation of frontal and direct opposition to this ideology.
How do you explain as you say in your book that Christians not only do not realize it but that ecclesiastics are silent. How do you explain this paradox?
The clergy are silent because they do not understand what is happening. Their intellectual level does not allow them to want to anticipate. They live from day to day. In the last lecture I gave, it was in Versailles. It was only for young people. There is not one who has bought a brochure or a book. There were 40 or 50 of them – they had come to a conference, that's all. For example, one of the forces of proposal of transhumanism is to graft into people's heads computerized tablets, micro-processors that will give them powers, therefore people who will have higher powers.
God who is behind everything, it is He who will sound the end of recess and He will do it brutally. He will do it all the more brutally, as we have been far away
While waiting for this time of God, here is a question I would like to leave to all readers : what can the Christian do? What should be his attitude, how can he resist and how can he live in this situation, in this world that is in upheaval and especially young people?
I wrote a notebook about screens, but with a medical focus. Screens are a disaster, they are one of the most important means of the new world order because they destroy intelligence. What for? Because we are passive in front of a screen. I'll give you an example: there's an American named Flynn, he had determined, we call it the Flynn project. He found that previously, let's say, before the arrival of screens that generations had an IQ that increased from one generation to another, in other words, we are smarter than our parents, our parents smarter than their parents, and that stopped abruptly in 1970. It is the appearance of screens and TV, the generalization of TV and he says that now we are going backwards and that since that time, children have lost 2 times 6 points of IQ, out of 100, 2 points out of 100, what is considerable is that the average child takes us back 50 years or 100 years back in terms of intelligence and intellectual development. We are witnessing an atrophy of intelligence, that of the brain for example
Concretely, practically, what should be the attitude of Christians today, not only of the people of our generation, but what advice, you who are like me an elder, would you give to young people today?
The first thing I would say is to go through the TV through the window. I don't want to be forged by people who lie all the time and secondly, I don't want to let my mind be destroyed by a device or by those people who talk to us and are liars. There is what you are told and there is what you are not told. You have to start by questioning what you are told and taking a step back from everything you are told.
Dr. Dickès passed away in August 2020, a few months after Jean-Marc Thobois. He is also the author of two books on transhumanism: The End of the Human Speciesand The Ultimate Transgression.