The new world :)

[ICEWIND]

TAC

Now we are back to the old discussion Evolution.
So, do you feel afraid of being wiped out by Evolution? Are you afraid of being downgraded as some Ape on Evolutions list.  

[Tac]

what are you talking about?

[ICEWIND]

I am talking about being replaced by the next step of Evolution the genetically engineered Human, you called them the elite and of course if you see them from a Evolutionary point of view the genetically engineered
Human will be on a higher level of life.

[fd ski]

 

Originally posted by cabby:

I don't separate a man's actions from his writings/beliefs for ANY reason

Excellent, then we can agree then anyone following Chistian Doctrine is bad and evil because of miltitude of attrocities that Church commited in last 2000 years or so, right ?


------------------
Bartlomiej Rajewski
aka. Wing Commander fd-ski
Northolt Wing
1st Polish Fighter Wing
303 (Polish) Squadron "Kosciuszko" RAF
308 (Polish) Squadron "City of Cracow" RAF
315 (Polish) Squadron "City of Deblin" RAF

Turning 109s and 190s into scrap metal since 1998

Northolt Wing Headquarters

[1776]

Would a cloned individual have a soul?

[Tac]

 

Originally posted by ICEWIND:
I am talking about being replaced by the next step of Evolution the genetically engineered Human, you called them the elite and of course if you see them from a Evolutionary point of view the genetically engineered
Human will be on a higher level of life.

No, I said it would be used as an elitist tool. Remember that short little man with the moustache circa 1938-1945 leading this swastika group?

On an evolutionary point of view, it would still be the same species of human, I dont recall asking for a new limb or an extra eye. Same organs, but working a hell of a lot better.  

Besides, I know I am more evolved that other humans, specially when compared to those n1k drivers   *grin*

[Qnm]

   

Originally posted by 1776:
Would a cloned individual have a soul?

Would it not then 'come down to' defining life?
 So is it:
A. Anything containing hereditary information.
B. An illusion.
C. It reverses local entropy.

Why is it (though doing so for daily life is understandable for practicality) 'great debates' (i.e. "Do (random skin color)'ed men have souls?" (and then 'Did the hundreds of enchained slaves have papers?' - arf arf arf)) accept to put in question any basis that is not as confirmed as possible (to not say absolutely proven), like:

"Does a man have a soul?", "What is time?", etc,  debates cluttered by issues/problems that are not truly related to the real question..
Or: Proffessor and student in Antartic study, spotted by hungry bear. Bear chases, student and professor run.
Student realizes real problem, stops to put on running shoes, outrunning professor and saving own life.

But everyday debates (i.e. neighbour to neighbour) do not dare reach for that much fundamentality (sp?)?

Endless downward spiral?

[hops back in P51]

[This message has been edited by Qnm (edited 04-03-2001).]

[R4M]

The more I read some people here, the more I am surprised.

I never thought that so closed minds could exist in year 2001.

Its clear I was wrong.

[Cabby]

Fd-Ski:

You are being silly.  Jesus Christ's actions speak louder than his words......

BTW, anyone can have a "church", but that doesn't mean God is there.  This is explained plainly in the Bible......

Cabby

[yaffle]

Mans prime evolutionary trait - the thing that makes us "fit" is intelligence. We stopped evolving on a physical level when we started to care for people who couldn't care for themselves (except for toes, people's toes are being evolved away apparently, shoes are to blame)  
Hitler, the prototypical mad eugenicist, would have Stephan Hawking executed out of hand - he is unfit, as far as Hitler is concerned. All that this tells us is that Hitler was a loonie.
The first uses for this technology will be ethically correct and probably acceptable to just about everybody bar a few nutters like Ted Kasincski (sp?)
Before a couple have a child, a genetic assay is performed. It is discovered that the parents will pass on to any potential child an hereditary disease of some kind ("Being a girl" in China  or "Downs Syndrome" in the US for example).  As soon as this is discovered the couple stop trying to have children by conventional methods and donate sperm/eggs to whatever clinic they have chosen. The "bad" genetic material is removed or replaced and the resulting "clean" zygote is implanted in the womb of the mother. Over many generations these diseases will disappear - mankind will have taken control of its own evolution.
This sort of thing happens now, except that the parents are forced to chose between taking the chance that the child will be whole and accepting the child if it is not, or having the child aborted and adopting.
(yes I know that many parents of disabled children love them and would react strongly to any suggestion that there is anything wrong with their kids, but can they honestly say that if they had a real chance, before the child was conceived, to remove the possibility of hereditary diseases, that they would say no?)

yaffle

btw icewind - did you know that thier is an attempt underway to clone a woolley mammoth from frozen remains? I don't have a link but I bet if you did a search you would find a ton of stuff.

[Qnm]

I can't be bothered to spend internet time looking for it when I could be playing AH, but isn't the wooley mammoth experiment to keep inseminating its genetical info into elephant (the genetically closest) females untill the total info is arbitrarely close enough?

What about using cloning tech to make someone immortal (age-less, not Superman)? Would eliminiting a defect that makes cell reproduction ineficient (sexuated reproduction for sake of arg.) be unethical?

[StSanta]

A clone is just an identical copy DNA, much like one egg twins are genetically identical.

Whether such a one would have a soul actually assumes that there is such a thing. Until evidence is presented, I think it's purely a religious argument, not a moral or ethical one.

------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
"If you return from a mission with a victory, but without your Rottenflieger, you have lost your battle."
- D. Hrabak, JG 54 "Grünherz"

[Tac]

Actually, I AM surprised we havent set up scientific colonies on the moon already. The tech was there since 1980. Guess the cold war gone means space is not of national security interest  . Bummer.

And those morons thinking they can clone Christ... i'll be laughing my bellybutton off when they find out they cloned the wrong person.They'd have to find the body itself, and even then there's no friggin way to confirm it really was him.

[Sturm]

I would just want one that does not "NAG" I will pay any price for that.  For those that know what I am talking about you too would pay for this.  Course the side affects are she has no arms, she is "bleached" blond can't carry a conversation to save here life, lazy, eats like a horse "Literally" and chews tobacco.  Sound familiar?  Guys from the south ought to chime in soon  

------------------
Sturm6 StaffelKapitän
JV44 Platzschutzstaffel
Airfield Defense Squadron

[ICEWIND]

Tac you are basically right.
For instance if a person has better eye sight by nature that does not make him to a new species of Human compared to a person who has bad eyesight by nature.

But as I already said the optical appearance of Humans will not be of importance only the possession of certain Genes will be important. But still, fiddling with Genes intentionally is  also a kind of artificial Manmade mutation and therefore can also be called Evolution in a scientific way to see things.
And just because a species looks similar to another does not mean that are Genetically closely related. If you look at all the species of cats for instance you can say of course that all cats look they same somehow, but that does not mean that they are closely related to each other. Even different species of cats of the same size are not always able to mix with each other.
All subspecies of different animals are somehow related to each other but are in most cases  to far apart that you can say that they are genetically the same.
The Homo sapiens Neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens sapiens are also a good example. Both looked the same and probably had the same mental abilities. But newly done  genetically analysis have shown that genetic information of the a Homo sapiens sapiens are so different to Homo sapiens Neanderthalensis that as one Scientist said it as you were looking at the Gene information of a Alien. That leads us to 2 different Human species that are so far apart that they are not related to each other but can still both be called Humans.
Only one made it to the Gate.(or maybe they are already waiting)

That's also counts for Humans(us) at what point can we say that a Gene manipulated Human is not a Homo sapiens sapiens anymore? Because he does not carry the inherited Genetical information of the (traditional) Homo sapiens sapiens  anymore.
Or should  we say that a massively gene  manipulated human is a advancement of the Homo sapiens sapiens and therefore something new?

Thanks to Gene manipulation we are already starting to have a definition problems.

The possibilities of gene manipulation are boundlessly , Gene manipulation will not stop with good eyesight or good memory. And we the (traditional) Homo sapiens sapiens  maybe will wind-up one day on the red list of endangered species.

yaffle
Yes I know, thanks anyway.



[This message has been edited by ICEWIND (edited 04-04-2001).]