When I saw this clip from a TED talk I assumed that the speaker was simply a 2nd-rate crank.

After all one way to get clicks on the internet is to rage post–find some outrageous example from the fringe and pretend that what you are watching is mainstream.

Everybody who has to produce content is tempted to do this, and sometimes the example is so tempting that not giving in is tantamount to ignoring a slow pitch in the strike zone.

This video is a slow pitch in the strike zone, but unfortunately, the speaker is actually somebody who is not a second-rate crank, but a guy who runs the NYU School of Public Health’s Center for Bioethics.

He is, in other words, one of the key guys in the establishment that has been bringing the COVID tyranny to America.

"Bioethicist", S. Matthew Liao: In order to tackle "climate change", humans should be genetically modified to be intolerant to meat.

"If we eat less meat, we could significantly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Now, some people would be willing to eat less meat, but they… pic.twitter.com/0kM4I8mnf0

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) September 5, 2023

Liao argues that the danger of climate change is so great that we should consider bioengineering human beings to make us intolerant to meat proteins.

Liao’s argument is striking in many ways, not the least of which is that he tells us that geoengineering is too dangerous but bioengineering is not. Not to put too fine a point on it, but the example he uses–injecting sulfates into the atmosphere–is not fundamentally different than what happens constantly due to natural volcanic activity.

Genetically engineering human beings has no analog in nature.

We shouldn’t be surprised that a prominent member of the public health establishment would openly propose engineering human beings to satisfy his vision of how human beings should behave. What would have been a scene out of a dystopian science fiction novel a few decades ago is now enacted on the public stage almost weekly.

Biological experiments that would have been considered human rights abuses a decade ago–such as sterilizing and mutilating children–are now considered gold standard care in the same manner that lobotomies were in the 1940s and 50s.

What ties all these horrors together is the underlying transhumanist vision that postulates the infinite malleability of human beings and human behavior. Once you dispose of the idea of human nature–that God or evolution created human beings with a specific nature and in a specific body–the person becomes a canvas on which literally anything can be painted.

You can see the attraction–as Dostoevsky put it “If God is dead then everything is permitted” has a great attraction to many people. The modern Left, as born in the French Revolution, has always been about sweeping away the natural limits and reshaping human beings and human society.

And that now includes the human body itself, as we have learned to manipulate biology. What, exactly, prevents us from reshaping the body into what we want? And if there is no God, what, exactly, should prevent the stronger and more intelligent from reshaping the weak and less intelligent who cannot see the truly good?

We’ve already seen this vision implemented during the COVID pandemic, where people like Liao and others in the public health establishment established rules for us to live by, conducted medical experiments on us against our will, and bullied us as they saw fit.

Genetically engineering the next generation isn’t a stretch. In fact, it is the next logical step.