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.

 

Warning over dangers posed by creation of 'artificial life'

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Warning over dangers posed by creation of 'artificial life'


news.scotsman.com

In the United States, scientists have controversially used the technique to create an entirely new type of life. However, a report by scientists at the University of Nottingham highlights ethical and social concerns over the use of synthetic biology and recommends new controls and regulations need to be put in place.

One area of concern is "bioterrorism", where synthetic biology could be used to produce new organisms designed to be hostile to humans.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Scary stuff, I could see this being used for Bioterrorism.

-Kdial1

news.scotsman.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 01:17 PM
link   
We could just as easily make organisms that heal the body. Or organisms that clean the body. Or organisms to kill the terror organisms.

In the future, I see certain medications or chemicals that will normalize human bodies, or immunize them from harm.

For every negative, there is an equal and opposite positive. Because of that, your fear wont scare me.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Wait, Bioterrorism is only being discussed now?

Dear god i really am 5 years ahead of society.



Anyway, ALLisONE;

No one is trying to scare you, but you're being irrational anyway.

Didn't you ever hear about how technological warfare worked?

One side makes a weapon, and the other side makes something that can defend against it, then the original group makes an even better weapon which can defeat that defence, and then the second group make an even better defence.

And so on and so forth until there's just one guy sitting in a giant plexi-glass dome/force-field with skulls and bones for company.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Irrational? No


Have you ever herd of suicide?

Who will be their slaves when they successfully convinced everyone to give up? Do they want to be alone on this planet or something? Their own little gay orgy?

They are going to kill themselves before they take full control. I have already seen the end of this movie.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Oh, okay, so they're not just going to kill everyone?

Well that makes for quality family entertainment.




posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
We could just as easily make organisms that heal the body. Or organisms that clean the body. Or organisms to kill the terror organisms.


But we won't. Healthy humans are not good for the medical establishment, and they have the lobbying power to crush any attempt to create a perfect world for humans, health wise.

The medical industry is a business. It needs customers to survive. They're not interested in people's health. They're interested in money.


Originally posted by ALLis0NE
Do they want to be alone on this planet or something? Their own little gay orgy?


Yes



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
Do they want to be alone on this planet or something? Their own little gay orgy?


Yes


Someone should remind them that orgy's are more fun when more people are involved.


Back on subject:

Is there such thing as "artificial life"?? I don't think there is. It's either alive, or its not.

Am I artificial life? My parents made me.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
Am I artificial life? My parents made me.


Some people would say that we're all artificial.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by PsychoHazard
 


Good points, both of you. Everything that we can create is because it is "allowed", and it is allowed because it is the way that the universe works. The blueprints to create these things have always existed, we're jsut finally re-membering them and putting it together. Energetic knowledge is trancendent! It can not lie if you are objective in your studies!



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   
if that happens, then there is no excuse to kill another being. Not just ordinary but biologically...it sounds crazy but i don't trust science cause it's the same as religion, BS.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 04:31 PM
link   
okay, a little too spiritual for my tastes, but I'll throw in my viewpoint.

The human race is pretty basic, horribly fragile, and completely unsuited for the majority of the things we will want to do in the future.

Hence, I feel it's necessary to design a better life form which can take off from where us humans leave off. Personally, it would be nice to see us create a version of ourselves that is more suited to explore other planets. Of course it would be up to that new version to decide on whether it actually wants to, but it opens up the options of expansion better than we flawed humans can hope to achieve.


Technically, what is a human? Our offspring made in our image. If we engineer our offspring, do they cease to be our offspring? No. Hence, they remain to be human.

There are of course fundamentalists who are scared of anything remotely different from themselves. But I don't see those fundamentalists surviving the future. Not that they'll die... they'll just be forced to take a more open approach to their differences.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnsky
Not that they'll die...


It's a shame the ones with good ideas will be the first to go.




posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
Is there such thing as "artificial life"?? I don't think there is. It's either alive, or its not.

Am I artificial life? My parents made me.


No, there's a difference between artificially created and naturally created life.

Artificial life is alive, but it was created through scientific manipulation and unnatural processes.

Natural life is alive, but it was created through natural processes and natural abilities in tune with nature.

In both instances, the being is "alive", but because artificial life lacks the natural characteristics of insemination and development, it should be considered separate from natural life.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
Natural life is alive, but it was created through natural processes and natural abilities in tune with nature.


You think humans are in tune with nature? I think you must know of a different humanity than I do.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
Artificial life is alive, but it was created through scientific manipulation and unnatural processes.


Unnatural processes??? You mean, natural humans giving life to other natural humans that naturally learn and grow natural knowledge to create life, is some how unnatural?

I think anything humans do is in a way "natural". After all, we all are natural beings, and we all naturally learned how to create life.

Are children born by "artificial insemination" unnatural in your eyes?

[edit on 10-6-2008 by ALLis0NE]



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsychoHazard
You think humans are in tune with nature? I think you must know of a different humanity than I do.


Did I say that? You find where I said that and I'll say yes I do.

And before you say what you "think", give me a chance to respond. It just shows you're making assumptions based on nothing.

No, I don't think humans are in tune with nature overall. But I do think the common way of insemination and birth is in tune with nature because that is how it was intended to be. Manipulating genes and "artificially" (meaning any other way aside from the common method) inseminating women is not in tune with nature.

The only possible valid argument you could have for being for artificial insemination is that the woman cannot get pregnant in the traditional way. But I don't even really think thats a good enough argument because if you can't get pregnant in a natural way, you weren't meant to be pregnant.

If you can't get pregnant, adopt. There's plenty of children that don't have parents that need them. If you need the child to be your own flesh and blood to love them just as much, then you don't need to be a parent.


Originally posted by ALLis0NE
Are children born by "artificial insemination" unnatural in your eyes?


If by "unnatural" you mean outside the original "guidelines" set by nature, then yes. If by "unnatural" you are assuming that I am saying that artificially created children somehow are not alive and need to be exterminated, then no.

Manipulation of genes and changing something that is how it is for a reason (such as not being able to get pregnant) is not natural.

If it is not natural, it stands to have some consequences. Why put those children born by that method through that all because we want to be arrogant and pretend to "play God"?



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
We could just as easily make organisms that heal the body. Or organisms that clean the body. Or organisms to kill the terror organisms.

In the future, I see certain medications or chemicals that will normalize human bodies, or immunize them from harm.

For every negative, there is an equal and opposite positive. Because of that, your fear wont scare me.


what you just saised sounds like what a japanese proffesser said on "the world of tomorrow" broadcast in the uk a couple of days ago on the subject of nanoscience


[edit on 11-6-2008 by monkeybus]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join