Originally posted by Aliengod3
I figure that if a person is going to get an abortion, and the stem cells are ripe for the taking, then RECYCLE!![]()
Originally posted by Gilvan Blight
This makes me want to watch Gattica when I get home.
Personally I\'m of the Theory that we are in an era of Technological Darwinism. Humans Biologically have stopped evolving, or at least have stopped evolving through Darwin\'s theories.
Originally posted by uberdark
was watching michael j. fox this morning on the news and got to thinking this would be a good topic to discuss. i am for it personally. the first hospital we had our first child at would not let us keep his umbilicial because it was a religious funded church. the second church allowed us to keep our childs umbilical cord because it was not.
I hope my quoting of this won\'t be missinterpretated, it just made me think of Arthur C. Clarke\'s third \"law\" :Message original : Dedwrekka
Genetics is the weird, strange, magical science that I have only a real basic understanding of. (Same could be applied to Religion in my case as well).
Originally posted by L.E.J.
@ gilvan: i understand ur point on natural selection no longer being valid in humans but i disagree about the biological evolution as your point kind of disagrees with you.
like you said quadraplegics can have a \"normal life\" now (ig there is such a thing) and that is the case with many debilitating diseases / disablilities to the point where children in the future is not out of the question.
is that not biological evolution (if not strictly natural selection) ?
trust the bloody french to come up with good stuff like that!!Originally posted by green stuff
I hope my quoting of this won\'t be missinterpretated, it just made me think of Arthur C. Clarke\'s third \"law\" :Message original : Dedwrekka
Genetics is the weird, strange, magical science that I have only a real basic understanding of. (Same could be applied to Religion in my case as well).
\"3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.\"
And I think that the first two \"laws\" can be on topic :
\"1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.\"
But what best sums up my position on the topic is François Rabelais\' thought :
\"Science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul.”
Originally posted by Avelorn
But what happens when a small percentage of the population can genetically engineer themselves. Job competition? New ruling class? An increasing gap between rich and poor - even more unequal opportunities.
Very true. If you say that it\'s impossible, it\'s an ignorant statement, as it\'s just not very likely at the current time, not impossible.Originally posted by green stuff
I hope my quoting of this won\'t be missinterpretated, it just made me think of Arthur C. Clarke\'s third \"law\" :Message original : Dedwrekka
Genetics is the weird, strange, magical science that I have only a real basic understanding of. (Same could be applied to Religion in my case as well).
\"3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.\"
And I think that the first two \"laws\" can be on topic :
\"1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.\"