• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Scientists Create First Living Organism With 'Artificial' DNA

Absolutely, and mutations really aren't all that common (harmful ones) and in fact sometimes mutations occur due to adaptations needed to survive. For example the celts at one time around 60-70 generations ago had tiny amounts of iron in their diet so their body's compensated through a mutation that allowed for the body to code more codons to form proteins that increase absorption of iron.

Mutations aren't all that bad, sometimes they're helpful (Although it is unfortunate that that mutation ha become harmful due to the ease of access to iron today, although at the same time it is much rarer, showing that the body understands how to adapt well to conditions).

But of course experimentation as always, and safe experimentation at that.

yes sometimes they can be helpful. in the majority of the time they are harmful or lethal.
that is why this needs to be studied throughly before they start doing anything else.

plus they would need to know what would happen if they actually put it in a live host. making it isolated is one thing injecting it into a live host is something else.
that could have disasterous results.
 
It meant something. I'm guessing most people that read it understood it quite well.

last time i check fallacies were not arguments they were the sign of someone that can't carry an argument and are resorted to trying to debase someone to try and prove their point.
it shows just how bad you are at a discussion is all that it shows. needless to say i won't respond to anymore of these off topic comments from you.
 
Read a book back in the late 60s that explained why not. I believe it was by Desmond Morris but I could be remembering that wrong. What really stuck with me over the years is the truth of it. The author's premise was that we had reached a point where technological change had outpaced our society's ability to cope with (live with). And that this gulf between tech and understanding of that tech would greatly widen in upcoming decades until a fracture point was reached or an extinction level disaster was created by the gulf.
I think its more likely that this wont happen do to sheer happening. This will be engineered and plotted out. It will start with walled cities and end with technology = undefeatable sorcery to the uninitiated. Then eventually one of the "Gods" of the city will go rogue and share technology with all or earth, destroy all technology and reset, or destroy the earth.
 
yes sometimes they can be helpful. in the majority of the time they are harmful or lethal.
that is why this needs to be studied throughly before they start doing anything else.

plus they would need to know what would happen if they actually put it in a live host. making it isolated is one thing injecting it into a live host is something else.
that could have disasterous results.

Someone is probably going to bash me for this but why not experiment this on criminals convicted for things like mass murder and mass rape? Not like we need them anymore, perfect beings to test this on, think of it as hell for what they did in case hell doesn't exist :D
 
Someone is probably going to bash me for this but why not experiment this on criminals convicted for things like mass murder and mass rape? Not like we need them anymore, perfect beings to test this on, think of it as hell for what they did in case hell doesn't exist :D

yes because we want to create geneticly mutated murders and rapists.
 
Someone is probably going to bash me for this but why not experiment this on criminals convicted for things like mass murder and mass rape? Not like we need them anymore, perfect beings to test this on, think of it as hell for what they did in case hell doesn't exist :D
Because how many comic-book supervillans started when the government decided to experiment on prisoners?

:2razz:
 
yes because we want to create geneticly mutated murders and rapists.

Hahahaha, they have life sentences, they wnt go anywhere, plus security is insane for the experiments. No genetic mutation realistically by this kind of experimentation would be able to withstand huge brunt force. This isn't a movie, dispose of the criminals after testing is complete, they're good for nothing but results, afterwards they can go in the earth.

They lost all their rights when they broke the laws in such a way anyway.
 
Hahahaha, they have life sentences, they wnt go anywhere, plus security is insane for the experiments. No genetic mutation realistically by this kind of experimentation would be able to withstand huge brunt force. This isn't a movie, dispose of the criminals after testing is complete, they're good for nothing but results, afterwards they can go in the earth.

They lost all their rights when they broke the laws in such a way anyway.

depends they could make zombie criminals. i mean that is how all the zombie movies start anyway some scientist thinking that he is cool makes a stupid DNA mutation that he accidently infects himself or someone else gets infected.

yes i know it is the movies but what they are messing with is real and can have unexpected results.
 
Because how many comic-book supervillans started when the government decided to experiment on prisoners?

:2razz:

It will never get that far. War would erupt during the debate over what color these new people should be.

Science is easy, sociology is hard.
 
depends they could make zombie criminals. i mean that is how all the zombie movies start anyway some scientist thinking that he is cool makes a stupid DNA mutation that he accidently infects himself or someone else gets infected.

yes i know it is the movies but what they are messing with is real and can have unexpected results.

No doubt about it, but if you actually read upon what the effects are of the new DNA nucleotide bases you would understand that it essentially helps create more codons to create more proteins which allows for a richer internal environment inside someone. It doesn't take some random person and turn him into a 10 foot tall invincible giant that can withstand 50 Cals. and 120MM smoothbore cannons.

Point in case, get your mind out of sci-fi, should something go wrong the sheer firepower of security will handle it.
 
It will never get that far. War would erupt during the debate over what color these new people should be.

Science is easy, sociology is hard.

Sociology is a rough life indeed, never before has a major cost so much to earn but give so ****ing little XD
 
No doubt about it, but if you actually read upon what the effects are of the new DNA nucleotide bases you would understand that it essentially helps create more codons to create more proteins which allows for a richer internal environment inside someone. It doesn't take some random person and turn him into a 10 foot tall invincible giant that can withstand 50 Cals. and 120MM smoothbore cannons.

Point in case, get your mind out of sci-fi, should something go wrong the sheer firepower of security will handle it.

if you haven't noticed i am being a bit sarcastic.

I am just urging caution. as what it is suppose to do doesn't mean that it will do that.
it has nothing to do with sci-fi other than mixing a bit of humor into it.

I think it is interesting but more research is needed.
 
if you haven't noticed i am being a bit sarcastic.

I am just urging caution. as what it is suppose to do doesn't mean that it will do that.
it has nothing to do with sci-fi other than mixing a bit of humor into it.

I think it is interesting but more research is needed.

Remember there is no tone in the internet >.> I cannot distinguish anything really other than fact and opinion without at least the help of a smilie (and even then its a grey area).
 
Well, I think if we don't wipe ourselves out that via technology, humans will be as close to immortality as possible. And think of it. It was done by humans...just humans. :shock: I love it!

In terms of consciousness and spirituality, we might already be immortal.
 
Except for, you know, keeping him alive for years after his spinal cord injury.

That's not what the picture depicts, it shows boys running. So you support an exaggerated lie. I'm not surprise.
 
Hahahaha, they have life sentences, they wnt go anywhere, plus security is insane for the experiments. No genetic mutation realistically by this kind of experimentation would be able to withstand huge brunt force. This isn't a movie, dispose of the criminals after testing is complete, they're good for nothing but results, afterwards they can go in the earth.

They lost all their rights when they broke the laws in such a way anyway.

Gawd.
It was hyperbole, I thought, the first time but now you sound half-serious.
 
Close to immortality?

**** that

Let's strive for absolute biological immortality!!!! FOR HUMANITY! I don't care if there may be other life forms in this universe. All I care is that we show them our superiority, and that they bow to us, the strongest species of the universe.

Considering there are galaxies eons older than ours and that the stars closer to the galactic core are hundreds of millions/billions older than Sol, that's unlikely.
 
Dead serious, criminals should have absolutely no rights depending on the crime.

How does one get such a touching, child-like faith in the state that they'd give it that kind of power? I wouldn't give the government the right to capital punishment- I don't trust the beast enough.
How do you know you're 'liberal' with that level of confidence in authority?
 
How does one get such a touching, child-like faith in the state that they'd give it that kind of power? I wouldn't give the government the right to capital punishment- I don't trust the beast enough.
How do you know you're 'liberal' with that level of confidence in authority?

Already explained in other threads how I am mainly Liberal yet have other views compared to Liberals.

Yes, in terms of handling cruel criminals, I do give a "child-like" faith in the govt. It's bad enough these murderers get fed and housed for life, may as well put them to use.
 
Back
Top Bottom