greenwizard

Is science going too far?

Are scientist going too far with technology?  

19 members have voted

  1. 1. Should they be able to do anything they want?

    • Yes, I don't think scientists are doing anything wrong
      12
    • No, they shouldn't try to play God
      4
    • Undecided
      3


Recommended Posts

That is what I was saying though. The cloned meat, minus the animal would indeed be faster, but would you wish to consume the meat? Like I said before, a quivering mass of muscle tissue growing in some pseudo amniotic brine is just unappealing to me. While I am a fan of brine of most kinds, especially the kind in which preserved rats float, I draw the line at briny meat. Just saying… :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problems with eating cloned meat as long as it doesn't kill me. We do so many different tests and spray tons of shit on our fruits and vegetables already, I don't see a problem with clone meat, but I can see how some people can't trust science to do it correctly and there is the whole psychological issue that you aren't eating natural meat, which would probably be the only thing that bothered me about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no problems with eating cloned meat as long as it doesn't kill me. We do so many different tests and spray tons of shit on our fruits and vegetables already, I don't see a problem with clone meat, but I can see how some people can't trust science to do it correctly and there is the whole psychological issue that you aren't eating natural meat, which would probably be the only thing that bothered me about it.

I'm sure you wouldn't even know you were eating it. Think about it, what's in a hotdog? How about the meat at McDonalds?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey they advertise (McDonalds) that their meat is 100% beef... whatever that means. While I am no fan of hot dogs, I alas must partake on one every so often gleefully and on Friday sans the bun. The mystery is part of the allure for some people, I'm sure. Take bologna for instance, what's up with that? I am unsure of meat rinds as well. I say let my meat be free of rinds!!

But really any thoughts about Harpp? That must be no good, it just has to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey they advertise (McDonalds) that their meat is 100% beef... whatever that means. While I am no fan of hot dogs, I alas must partake on one every so often gleefully and on Friday sans the bun. The mystery is part of the allure for some people, I'm sure. Take bologna for instance, what's up with that? I am unsure of meat rinds as well. I say let my meat be free of rinds!!

But really any thoughts about Harpp? That must be no good, it just has to be.

And cloned meat would be 100% beef too, that's all they have to say. Maybe they're already using cloned meat... or maybe science really HAS gone too far and they're using... soylent green...

What's Harpp? did I miss something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And cloned meat would be 100% beef too, that's all they have to say. Maybe they're already using cloned meat... or maybe science really HAS gone too far and they're using... soylent green...

What's Harpp? did I miss something?

Yes you have missed something... the irony in my last post about the meat content... and yes, look in my other posts for the link to Harpp!! That is how 'they' control the weather. Soylent green, that is a nice touch. Soylent green is people!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WHAT HAS SCIENCE DONE?!!!!

I think this is more a discussion about eugenics than science. Science is a principle of observation and study. Applying its results is a matter of politics and values.

Or how about the fact that the over use of anti bacterial products are producing 'super bugs'. I don't think that scientific advancements are a bad thing completely. I just think that they need to use their heads more.

Err.... you do realize that it was science and "people using their heads" that found about the superbugs in the first place? We could be using accidentally discovered antibiotics without any scientific testing and monitoring, and the bacterial resistance growth would still be there, we just wouldn't know about it. That's like saying science is responsible for disease for finding the bacteria in the first place. The people overusing the antibacterial products are doing it because of advertisements and lack of knowledge, because they haven't paid attention to the scientific study and recommendations. Hint: that TV commercial guy in the white coat isn't a real scientist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Science is just a tool we use to understand the environment we live in, technically it can never "go to far." How the knowledge we gain is applied is the real issue. There will always be controversial scientific discoveries and practices. The Catholic Church still thinks that the invention of birth control was "going to far". Its all a matter of opinion really. About the only thing that comes to mind that I personally feel goes to far are weapons of war, I mean I know its a part of human nature to kill and stuff but it would be nice if all the resources being used to develop better ways to kill each other would be put to something more useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Agaib
Soylent green is people!!

omg spoilerz!!11

On a more serious note. Science is merely the collection of knowledge through observation. Experimentation is creating situations that will reveal (hopefully) informative observations. Science can never go to far, experiments can, that's why there are rules for how experiments are conducted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Science is just a tool we use to understand the environment we live in, technically it can never "go too far." How the knowledge we gain is applied is the real issue.

You've pretty much summed up my feelings on the subject as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted undecided.

But, the other day I saw a story on the news about them (the science people) may be able to choose the gender of a child before it is born. This is just disgusting, and going way too far!

There's a faint line between 'science' and 'science - removing the natural order of life, death and the world, so they can take control over everything', if you know what I mean.

When bowling, you cross that line on the lane and your shot doesn't count. Medical Science needs to see that line and stay the f*ck behind it! Start saving some lives instead of trying to choose and design unborn babies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

eh, i dont really care what goes on, im one of those as long as it dont involve me and my family, eh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted undecided.

But, the other day I saw a story on the news about them (the science people) may be able to choose the gender of a child before it is born. This is just disgusting, and going way too far!

There's a faint line between 'science' and 'science - removing the natural order of life, death and the world, so they can take control over everything', if you know what I mean.

When bowling, you cross that line on the lane and your shot doesn't count. Medical Science needs to see that line and stay the f*ck behind it! Start saving some lives instead of trying to choose and design unborn babies.

Well, I think we had already spoken about this in this thread, but when you say "scientists" (specifically, geneticists) are able to choose the gender or whatever of an unborn child, you're missing a point. It's not scientists who decide, it's always the unborn child's parents who make the choice based on the information and options given to them by scientists. Whether that's an ethical decision or not, it has NOTHING to do with "scientists" being the evil geniuses some people imagine them to be, or conversely, the saviors of mankind, as some other people tend to believe. A scientist (whatever his field of expertise may be) is nothing more than a researcher, or someone who puts into practice the discoveries made by other men of science, GENERALLY (but not always) with the sole intention of improving mankind's way of life. Sadly, there are always people in positions of power (read: soldiers, politicians, etc) who see in scientific discoveries an opportunity to gain an edge against whatever their competition turns out to be. Take Einstein's research for example. While he may have had the best intentions while researching, it certainly wasn't good ol' Albert who decided to use his research to make an atomic bomb. Same thing goes for Geneticists and Micro-Biologists and all the nasties used in Chemical and Bacteriological warfare.

All that said, I can't say I'm too sure about the whole "line" thing ausyandy mentioned. I do like to believe we might come to an age when we have the technology to live our lives the way WE want them to be, and to reach that point, science has to move forward. BUT, there's one little thing that bothers me, and that most people seem to forget (and this is one point where I totally agree with Shinskitten, and I think more people should). What I'm talking about is: Just because we have the technology to make something happen, doesn't mean we MUST make it happen. You know the drill. It's all about freedom of choice. If you believe abortion or genetic engineering go against god's will, then stay away from them, oppose them with your indifference, and let people who make use of them burn in hell.

On a little side note, and since this thread hasn't been too active lately, I'd like to stir up a little debate, just for the sake of argumentation and sharing one's point of view.

You see, while I'm not against religion or religious people, if the world was but a simple tug-o-war between science and religion, I'd back Science all the way. HOWEVER, there is much more in play than that. There are Social, historical, geopolitical and economical factors in play as well. So, I've got a question for those of you out there who DON'T support recent scientific advances. Here it is:

If you oppose scientific improvement, could you provide a solid argument other than "It's against God's will", or "It's men playing God", for a change?

PLEASE NOTE that I'm not asking this to attack religion or religious people, I just think that we should think outside the frame of "Science vs. Religion". For instance, I think genetic engineering has (and will continue to have) deep social and economical repercussions, since only rich people can afford to "modify" their babies to their liking. It might not seem like a big economical issue right now, but in the near future (assuming governments don't ban genetic research), when enough people want their children to be smarter and more talented than the norm, poorer people (and countries) will be stuck with whatever Mother Nature decides to give them, while people and societies with enough money will "purchase" the best kids money can buy. That will increase the social differences everywhere, and richer countries will grow richer, while poorer countries continue to become poorer.

So there. What do you think?

Saitochan

P.D.: I'm really sorry if I hurt anybody's feelings or beliefs. That was not my intention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a naturalist. Those are my personal beliefs. I'm trying to discover the knowledge that was lost when the age of technology started. The age of technology isn't working for me very well. It turned me into a schizophrenic depressed person with anger issues. And the only solution modern technology gives me is drugs that make me high and turn me into a zombie. When I discovered crystal magic it did wonders for me. Aromatherapy works well too. And this stuff is ancient knowledge. Speaking of which, I need to go find my grounding stone.....

I also prefer to do the naturalist style whenever possible. The chemicals a series of doctors force fed me when I was teenager caused a massive stroke, damaged my heart, and worse. There are plenty of drugs on the market that you see advertized of late with side effects far worse than the original medical problem. :( I want no part of said FDA approved drugs. I found an awesome herbal healer that did wonders for my genuine medical condition and has removed the probability of a second catastrophic stroke such as I suffered in 97 from the damned prescription drugs meant to control my unstable blood pressure/hormone imbalance.

I know what you mean about being turned into a schizophrenic zombie. You see, I had a bout of schizophrenia myself. I am a staunch researcher of what one might call Shamanic Science, or as I like to put it an Independent Occult Science Researcher. As such I am involved in the deep mystery of ancient magic such as is outlined in The sacred magic of Abramelin the mage, The key of king solomon the king, John Dee's five books of mystery, and other such things.

Insofar as my bout of schizophrenia is concerned, I can chalk that up to bad LSD and a botched experiment in Bicameral Thinking.

I come from an ancient religion background because my whole family is considered an old Priest born blood line. Most of those who grew up with the old ways flat refuse to give any of the knowledge we managed to keep alive to individuals like yourself, which I think is absurd. The Dion Fortune cop out has become the norm among the old bloodlines. Shake my head over the stupidity as I fight my own on the topic almost daily. The second huge excuse is that if the old bloods start talking to outsiders, we will face a second burning times. Can't remove their paranoia about getting slaughtered, so you were forced into such a horrific experience. For that I am genuinely sorry. Every time I come across your situation I get even madder at the terror still overwhelming the old priesthood blood lines who could put an end to this kind of suffering. Sadly, I do not see that happening so long as there exists a pocket of militant variety minority Christians. The Burning times saw 13 million women slaughtered simply because they knew herbal remedies and cures. Teaching genuine "Hermetics" openly is not going to happen any time soon. Magic is the use of a very specifically focused mind type of prayer. If you can't find the right mental discipline and the correct way to shift your life force into the correct channel, you can't perform magic with any ease. Of course, Science can't prove that theory yet. ROFL. However, they did prove that the mind controls things with quantum mechanics experiments. Hahahaha. They might even catch up some day and the old bloods will not have to live in fear of a few fanatical zealots who have convert or die on their minds. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article talks about meat that is grown without creating a living animal. They are just cloning the muscle tissue. If the can do that it would probably be alot cheaper then raising animals when you consider the cost of land, feed, water, operating a slaughter house, etc. Yeah scientists are expensive and you have to run the lab, but if you just get a bunch of muscle stem cells, code them into chicken, beef, or pork and then let them grow, it could probably become a fast and easy process.

I beg to differ on this topic. The FDA has put laws in place that make Feed Lot Cattle into steroid chemical dumps already. The number of animals my relative sees suffering with cancerous tumors at his slaughterhouse is horrific. 1 out of 3 cattle have mass cancer when they are slaughtered as a yearling. The reasoning is that Free Range cows require 3 years to mature to slaughter stage. Economically, feed lot Steroid cattle are slaughtered as yearlings and produce the same amount of meat as the three year old Steroid free cow.

Here's the kicker, Human rates of several types of cancer has risen alongside the cheaper meat Government enforced feed lot Steroid heavy cow and pig production. The FDA has prevented a group of scientists from doing the research that could potentially link the specific steroid class fed to Feed Lot Cattle and Pigs to the rising cancers noticed by this group of researches.

Second: Cloned animals are being produced with human organs in three research facilities in America. Other countries known to me that are using pigs for identical research; China. They have eight research facilities that are known the last time I checked on that.

However, does it not beg consideration that a sheep with a human heart and liver once slaughtered for a life saving Organ transplant could get passed off in the local grocery store because some politician gets a kick back from somewhere? Happens all the time in the USA. And we still re-elect such corrupt jerks because they are the lesser of the two evils we get to choose from at the ballot box. I consider that cannibalism since it is a fusion of Human and Sheep DNA that made the creation of the specific human organs possible.

On to Nano tech: If you want to have your local, State, and Federal Government knowing everything about you that can be known and potentially abusing nano tech with you becoming the patsy for any number of unethical uses, more power to you. I for one refuse to have anything capable of tracking me implanted. I would rather die outright and remain free. The potential abuses that will be brought into play by Governments across the world is staggering. Big Brother as some refer to USA Government surveillance is bad enough that every email and all the rest are monitored. You can't even walk down the street in some major cities without a camera watching you at every one of the traffic lights.

To put it tongue in cheek: I would like to know that whenever nature calls I can take a crap without a machine measuring the chemical composition and centimeters of length and width at some politician's whim. Same goes for what I choose to eat, drink and say in private. IF I wanted to Government to know who I sleep with, or my fave sexual position, I'm quite capable of telling them.

Seriously, in this case, the possibility for abuse and the potential for some unidentified government group to order a soldier to hit a kill switch from outside the human body on another whim exists. Nano tech can be set up in very dangerous ways that I do not like overall. Even a diagnostic tool can be re-programmed with the right equipment. When it gets turned into a tracking chip that reveals all, it is too late to protest that branch of science getting abused by soldiers, politicians, the FBI, CIA and any other number of government entities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say that your cartoon is both entertaining and has validity also, Tigro. Whenever science does more harm than good, it is time to rethink the reason for it to exist. The same applies for Religion, and many other regulatory disciplines. Harmonic living is important, self responsibility is necessary. Science can do many great and wonderful things, yet it is also capable of destroying and enslaving also. :) When it enslaves and harms it does become a case of Ego out of control me thinks. Thanks so much for sharing this cartoon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say that your cartoon is both entertaining and has validity also, Tigro. Whenever science does more harm than good, it is time to rethink the reason for it to exist. The same applies for Religion, and many other regulatory disciplines. Harmonic living is important, self responsibility is necessary. Science can do many great and wonderful things, yet it is also capable of destroying and enslaving also. :) When it enslaves and harms it does become a case of Ego out of control me thinks. Thanks so much for sharing this cartoon.

Huh?!

I guess Poe's law strikes again...

The message i got from that comic is that irrational fear of science would never have allowed us to go past being cavemen...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cartoon is a double edged sword in truth. Science can be both good and bad. I got the ideal that it depends upon how the science gets used in the end. When the guy got his own head dumped on, I saw that is a reminder to be careful how you chose to use the science. The fact he burns the cave, another such reference. Chuckles. I saw both sides of the equation in the cartoon you posted. The good and the bad have a place, and requires common sense is the message I got. :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now