It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: PublicOpinion
Mengele worked for 'his' science of evolution as well, didn't he?
The concept of genetics and eugenics controled masses as well, we're talking about ethics and moral scruples in science here.
originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Subnatural
I think they just want you to be a bit more mindful before you establish. It doesn't take much to respect, right?
And this thread is a perfect example of the intelligence I'm supposed to repect?
Respect without integrity is fear.
When evolution is finally vindicated, when men finally produces that common
ancestor and I believe someday, someone will. They will fall to their knees and worship
him.
originally posted by: Barcs
originally posted by: PublicOpinion
Mengele worked for 'his' science of evolution as well, didn't he?
The concept of genetics and eugenics controled masses as well, we're talking about ethics and moral scruples in science here.
Social darwinism has nothing to do with the science of evolution. Evolution isn't about exterminating anybody that doesn't fit your ideal "person type". It's about modification with decent and changing the frequency of alleles in a population via natural selection and genetic mutation. Social darwinism is not based on any type of science, although many claimed it was in the past. The problem is that there is no justification for it, and I do not see it controlling anybody today.
Scientific advances and the ways they may be used are often unfamiliar to us and may even be frightening. Consider the possibility of genetically engineering humans to enhance desirable traits, or perhaps taking a test that provides you with a list of diseases you are likely to develop in the future. New technologies such as these are often developed before we can integrate them into our lives in a meaningful way, thereby generating a need for open discussion of what is ethical, what society deems acceptable or unacceptable, and what legal protections are required to ensure that we are safe from harm.
originally posted by: PublicOpinion
Why do you think some terrorists burn down shelters full of asylum-seekers today? You don't think it may relate to racism and some nasty concepts of eugenics? You don't think decades of agitation and materialistic misconceptions did their part in this?
How about modern biology then?
Scientific advances and the ways they may be used are often unfamiliar to us and may even be frightening. Consider the possibility of genetically engineering humans to enhance desirable traits, or perhaps taking a test that provides you with a list of diseases you are likely to develop in the future. New technologies such as these are often developed before we can integrate them into our lives in a meaningful way, thereby generating a need for open discussion of what is ethical, what society deems acceptable or unacceptable, and what legal protections are required to ensure that we are safe from harm.
If we do eventually learn how to guide our own evolution it will be a huge step for mankind, provided it is not used in a harmful way.