Genetics Research

[Vance]

I agree with our decaying morals, but even Islomofascism doens't seem that bad compared to: Genetics research. Go and rent one of thore movies at your library, how people could soon design their babies to be smarter, faster, handsomer, anything. It is now scientifically possible to extract night vision components from an owl and implant them into your future baby. If we do not draw a line, what is stopping us from breeding soldiers? After all, a soldier could use claws to defend himself, and he could use corrosive saliva to escape the prison bars... People are not drawing lines. And scientists are not going to listen to (for example) Christians, who have said the same thing before and will contine to say it for the next million years. And if the U.S. does not breed superhumans, other countries will. We can't compete with an embedded pack hunter mentality in an extreme fascist's army. We can't compete with fast, smart, vicious future humans. And it will be just as bad back home. Falilies who cannot afford to make their kids smarter will have to settle for less smart, and the rich children will be absolute prodigies. A rift will soon develop, and then there will only be "naturals" and "supers" So we have less moral methods with dealing with the Middle East. But we have to watch ourselves too. Once we do this we can't go back.

[Timothy Paradox]

Damn right. Also, cloning... There are 6.5 Billion people on this planet, and that's too much. What do you think is gonna happen when people can't die anymore because they keep cloning themselves? Disaster. Science is ok, and using science for the good of our species is also ok; but this is too much. I agree with our decaying morals, but even Islomofascism doens't seem that bad compared to: Genetics research. Go and rent one of thore movies at your library, how people could soon design their babies to be smarter, faster, handsomer, anything. It is now scientifically possible to extract night vision components from an owl and implant them into your future baby. If we do not draw a line, what is stopping us from breeding soldiers? After all, a soldier could use claws to defend himself, and he could use corrosive saliva to escape the prison bars... People are not drawing lines. And scientists are not going to listen to (for example) Christians, who have said the same thing before and will contine to say it for the next million years. And if the U.S. does not breed superhumans, other countries will. We can't compete with an embedded pack hunter mentality in an extreme fascist's army. We can't compete with fast, smart, vicious future humans. And it will be just as bad back home. Falilies who cannot afford to make their kids smarter will have to settle for less smart, and the rich children will be absolute prodigies. A rift will soon develop, and then there will only be "naturals" and "supers" So we have less moral methods with dealing with the Middle East. But we have to watch ourselves too. Once we do this we can't go back.

[thegnome54]

You can't "clone yourself" to avoid death! I also doubt that making "super-humans" will ever be feasible. Evolution has struck a delicate balance, and the human body is extremely complex and nuanced. You might think "adding claws" to someone would be easy, but it's really not that simple. And what's wrong with trying to make babies which are less likely to develop mental problems or disease? We already do everything we can to keep malfunctioning humans alive, so why not keep them from malfunctioning in the first place? This stinks of fear of the unknown to me.

[R.D.735]

I, for one, fully support moving in the direction of improving human capabilities, but I have to agree that genetics isn't the way to go for anything more than eliminating some of our more egregious biological flaws. I also have to agree that many of the supposed 'improvements' mentioned are pretty fanciful, rather than functional. These are minutiae, though, to the more pressing question of why such improvements will come about and if they will be equitably distributed. Competition has already been given as a possible cause for someone to build a supreme army, and it is exactly that which I would expect to propel progress int hat area, but competition with machines and software rather than competition with other people. To a limit, it's possible for people to compete by using better technology, but that adaptation will likely always be slower than the rate of technological process, which makes the fear of technological progress not as unjustified as it may at first seem. Automated processes decrease the number of jobs available overall, and lead to lower wages. Goods, however, become cheaper, and it is expected that the lower prices more than compensate for lower ability to spend. Society benefits overall, but the process also creates a huge divide between the rich owners of the factory, whose earnings increase, and the labor force, whose earnings fall. Humans must improve their output to compete equitably with machines, but those who have the need of such technology(workers) are less likely to have the means(money) to acquire it. In an ideal world, the prices of goods would fall significantly enough to allow human-enhancing technologies to proliferate among the workforce, but reality is not ideal, and rising prices could leave many people without the means to sustain themselves, even as human civilization is booming with technological progress. I don't know what the future holds, but I'm pretty certain that enhancing human abilities will not only be a demand, it will be a necessity.

[Timothy Paradox]

OK then. If you want groups of super-humans running around destroying stuff, go ahead. Oh, and by the way; I'm NOT afraid of the unknown. Power+those who don't deserve it (humans) = BOOM!

[Vance]

There are several problems still, though. 1. When will this technology be perfected? Will scientists jump ahead of themselves before it is ready? 2. It is not so much the future of mankind as a whole than the personal decisions parents will be making. 3. It is not so much about building armies than building people with exaggerated traits in general. 4. This isn’t just about humans. What scientists would never dare do with humans, they can do with their “organic synthetics” Basically a way of saying molding a creature. By manipulating the development cycle of an animal, or worse, creating new ones, scientists can experiment with various functional uses… (I am not suggesting anything outlandish, like a sci-fi post apocalyptic movie, but the danger is real) 5. Your system is perfect considering it is moderated. Government is telling scientists not to do things, but scientists are finding ways around. Government needs to tell scientists what to do to put this technology on the right path, so people can look at it’s constructive abilities rather than just “trying things out” 6. Gene therapy is a great idea. Gene-everything else is not. Like I said, there has to be some kind of moderator. I heard this from a former scientist: (If anyone knows the name of this corporation please post it) There is a corporation that does moderate genetic research, (I can’t remember the name) They mean ****ing business. A Japanese scientist was found experimenting with illegal genetic projects in his laboratory without the consent of the corporation. He was found beheaded and his lab was empty. They took everything. They killed him, confiscated all his equipment, and shut down the corporation he was affiliated with and any sponsors. I do stress that this is not just a story, if anyone has any other info about this corp. post it here… Goes to show that even scientists have authority over them.

[Carôusoul]

I'm a transhumanist actually; quite much so.. I essentially agree with Red.

[Timothy Paradox]

So you wouldn't mind if humanity would be replaced with robots and half human-half animal creatures? Isn't it tragic? Humans need to enhance their abilities so they can compete with machines...and machines are their own creation. Oh dear...

[Kushna Mufeed]

Creating an entire being from scratch is something I'd shy away from, even it is fear of the unknown. Such work could end up having drastic consequences. Cloning an entire living being is just wrong. But if you were to clone an organ, say a heart or a lung, and you could implant to save a human life, go right ahead.

[Timothy Paradox]

I agree. I just find it scary to think that people are willing to sacrifice their humanity for power... I don't want to live in a world where MUTANTS rule... Creating an entire being from scratch is something I'd shy away from, even it is fear of the unknown. Such work could end up having drastic consequences. Cloning an entire living being is just wrong. But if you were to clone an organ, say a heart or a lung, and you could implant to save a human life, go right ahead.

[Vance]

As much as I applaud all the posts so far, this is more about helpful mutations escalating way too far. So, if night vision helps humans overall, why not put that in? Until the point where "The only thing wrong with an extra limb is it is not aesthetically pleasing, but that is fine..." And then "Work has begun on the ultimate organic form, that is the most efficient and adaptable to date"

[Carôusoul]

So you wouldn't mind if humanity would be replaced with robots and half human-half animal creatures? Isn't it tragic? Humans need to enhance their abilities so they can compete with machines...and machines are their own creation. Oh dear... I don't see a problem.

[psychology student]

God forgive me, but I can't wait until all this stuff starts happening. Theres talk of lethal viruses that kill only those with a certain genetic code. Attaching robotic parts to the human brain, to improve performance. Extending life expectancy by 50% is apparently just around the corner, (I'll elaborate of you want to know more). Even further extensions are slightly further off. And those are just a few! Man, interesting stuff.

[Xei]

Genetics is conscious evolution. Over the millenia we have been sculpted blindly out of the mud. Now we are the sculptors, no longer blind but aware, talented, creative, and determined. That seems to be no bad thing at all for humanity.

[wendylove]

And scientists are not going to listen to (for example) Christians, When you believe in creationism, you have no place in science. 1. When will this technology be perfected? Will scientists jump ahead of themselves before it is ready? No they won't. Medical research has strict protocals, it has to be used in tons of trials to prove 99% it works which is long. They don't just design a drug and give it out, it takes years and alot of money. 2. It is not so much the future of mankind as a whole than the personal decisions parents will be making. This makes no sense. You can't design a sciencitist, someone smart or even politician. So the personailty of the person will not be drastically changed, unless we start making people with high function autism. 3. It is not so much about building armies than building people with exaggerated traits in general. Alot of things are not genetic, and the only thing we likely to understand about genes in depth is looks. Changing looks is not that big, we do it all the time with plastic surgery. Vance cannot you stop being a troll. Scienitist are not evil people and making up stories of evil genetic researcher is not clever. If your not a troll, then stop acting paranoid.

[Xaqaria]

homo habilis created a similar thread on a forum when he met his first sapien.

[Timothy Paradox]

Sorry, but I think this guy (Vance) is right. The only thing he's saying is that eventually the army will create legions of super-humans, and that is POSSIBLE and not paranoia at all... What I think is that there should be strict limits to genetic manipulation.

[Vance]

Vance cannot you stop being a troll. Scienitist are not evil people and making up stories of evil genetic researcher is not clever. If your not a troll, then stop acting paranoid. This debate is real, even among scientists. There is more that being careful here, you can blow yourself up with a bomb even with being careful. I did NOT say scientists were evil, and I again emphasize that the genetics researcher was not evil, merely shedding light on how seriously the scientific community takes this kind of work. And scientists are not going to listen to (for example) Christians, All I am saying is scientists in the end will not listen to moralists, whose opinions will not change, and who wants them to rain on your parade? I suggest you read the post more carefully, call people trolls less often and spell like a scientist. PS: Science has screwed up before.

[Xei]

I don't think genetics would be used to make weapons as in human soldiers. We already have the ability to destroy any country in a few minutes if necessary, what more would you need? The issue of most concern is probably biological weapons manafacture.