Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
On Genetic Modification
#91
that's like saying since mustard gas was created there's the possibility of it being released in a city environment after a war. Could it happen? Absolutely, however there is no guarantee, so I'm not worried
The Government of the Kingdom of Madrona in exile

o Nationalist o Activist o Monarchist o Royalist o Separatist o Humanist o Philanthropist o Realist o Research Scientist o Imperialist o Patriot o Progressive o
Reply
#92
(15 Aug 2016, 00:17:04)Emperor Markus II Wrote: Not all Muslims are terrorists, but virtually all terrorists are Muslim.

WRONG!!!!!  Markus, most terrorist attacks in the US are done by Far Right Wing groups.  I.E. Christian Terrorist Groups like the "Army of God" which bombs abortion clinics and gay bars, which is also the organization responsible for the 1996 Olympic Bombings.

What about the Oklahoma City Bombings, which was carried out by a Far Right Extremist White Christian.  Saying that "Virtually all Terrorists are Muslim", its just complete Rubbish.  There was also a KKK Plot to blow up a Natural Gas Plant in San Antonio, which would have killed 30,000 people.  If that was successful, than we would pay attention to All Forms of Terrorism, including Christian Terrorism.  Moving on...

Islamic Terrorism is not the Problem in the world.  Its all Terrorism in General, which includes Religious Extremists of all Religions, including Christianity.  Including people that bomb Abortion Clinics, and Gay Bars.  Terrorism, like Bullying is a form of Fascism.  The goal of Terrorism is to strike fear into people.  We shouldn't be afraid of Terrorists, because that's what they want.  Fear, they want to strike fear into people.  With, Terrorism in General out of the way, I will move on to Markus' comment about Humans being confined on Earth.

We don't have the resources to live on earth for millions of more years.  You know how Humans used to be nomads over 10,000 years ago.  We will still be nomads, but only in Space, and establishing New Civilizations with the help of New Technology.  We could in the future, Terraform Mars.  That is the purpose of Technology to improve the lives and living standards of humans.  Living for a Few Thousand Years with Genetic Engineering could allow the most Intelligent People to become even smarter and help improve societies.

It is also has the potential to Eradicate diseases like not only AIDS, but as well as Cancer by making the Immune System better Cancer Hunters.  In the future we wouldn't even need Vaccines which have been a life changing technology because you could become immune to a disease without risking the Complications and symptoms.  Because the child would be Genetically Engineers to be immune at Birth, vaccines would become outdated in most parts of life.

Markus, wants to take us back to Primitive Times when people thought the sun revolved around the earth.  Which is a Negative Future.  I want humans to explore new Systems and colonize New Planets.  I want to go into the future where we can colonize most of the Galaxy and discover new Alien Species.  I want a brighter future in sight.  But Markus wants to take us backwards into the past.
Yours Truly, Giovanni Tomelleri
Reply
#93
(26 Aug 2016, 00:12:47)phunanon Wrote: I have another point to make on genetic modification:
If it becomes ridiculously easy to edit genomes, it may also become so domestic to be used for terrorism, where it will be a battle of bio-warfare. You download the schematics for a plague-like virus, maybe Anthrax off the dark-net for the nostalgia, and it becomes a threat. Then you have medical services fighting those threats within every patient's body, and it would be like clever computer virus vs. anti-virus.
But do the pros outweigh the cons? I think so.

This is actually one of the things which does worry me; as with all powerful tools, they don't respect who is using them, they just exist. Unlike with nuclear proliferation, thing may be harder to keep a lid on too.
"For a timeless moment, a reality is experienced that exposes a gleam of the transcendental reality, in which universe and self, sender and receiver, are one." - Albert Hofmann

[Image: OAqnJea.png]

Minister of Diplomatic Affairs, Sandus. Find me on skype at live:jt148

Reply
#94
(12 Aug 2016, 21:55:33)Austenasia Wrote:
(11 Aug 2016, 05:32:25)Michael帝 Wrote: Dna doesn't last that long but could still have mammoths and stuff.

You wouldn't have thought so, would you? Not if they were millions of years old. But then again...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...ntury.html

(11 Aug 2016, 19:00:55)phunanon Wrote: Yet you believe in dinosaurs? You know, those things which have been proven to have been around millions of years ago
(11 Aug 2016, 19:13:17)RepublicofSmithvilleGovernment Wrote: It has been proven with Radioactive Dating that the Earth is 4.5 Billion Years Old.  

There are huge flaws in the vast majority of radioactive dating techniques.


(11 Aug 2016, 19:13:17)RepublicofSmithvilleGovernment Wrote: it is safe to say that Creationists are wrong by Evidence, and thank the Scientists for Evidence.
(11 Aug 2016, 19:23:59)Duchy of Hodiny Wrote: I don't believe the earth is 6000 years old, as there is plenty of evidence that points to it being a few billion years old.

Can you provide some of this evidence? I'm sure there's more than one way of interpreting it.

(12 Aug 2016, 03:40:39)DNSgov Wrote: I've read the Epic of Gilgamesh. It was written at least two thousand years before Genisis.

We can't know for certain when either was written. Furthermore, antiquity is no guarantee of reliability or authenticity; the correct details may have been preserved in an oral version which was written down later, while a garbled version may have been written down very shortly after the event.

(13 Aug 2016, 06:07:32)Austenasia Wrote:
(12 Aug 2016, 22:00:47)Tjorvi Wrote: I think you're deliberately trying to make it difficult to prove creationists wrong when you so willingly dismiss dating techniques, because it goes against your belief in an invisible man.

Also because, as I said, the vast majority of dating techniques based on radioactive decay have huge flaws with them. Give me an example, and I'll tell you what's wrong with it.

No, they really don't. Jon, have you become a creationist in my absence? Because let me tell you, there's a solid reason scientist use things like radiometric dating: they work. Now, if you're an idiot, you can screw them up, sure. But that's why proper scientists follow procedures to get uncontaminated samples etc etc. Seriously, though, the world? 4.5 billion years old. The universe, 13.6 billion years old. And I'll go fact for fact with you if you wanna, but that's going to be a pretty uneven fight.

[Image: 6a00d8341ca4d953ef01a3fcd641ea970b-pi]
"For a timeless moment, a reality is experienced that exposes a gleam of the transcendental reality, in which universe and self, sender and receiver, are one." - Albert Hofmann

[Image: OAqnJea.png]

Minister of Diplomatic Affairs, Sandus. Find me on skype at live:jt148

Reply
#95
(26 Aug 2016, 00:19:05)Tjorvi Wrote: that's like saying since mustard gas was created there's the possibility of it being released in a city environment after a war. Could it happen? Absolutely, however there is no guarantee, so I'm not worried
That's an incredibly good point, thank you very much for that.
Simply Communist.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)