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.

 

What the @# are these people thinking?

page: 2
14
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 


I'm still waiting for cats with human DNA that makes the cats have human speech centers in their brains.

Imagine kitty saying,"let me out side you dumb human!"

or

"Jelly beans with human DNA? What a stupid human!"

or

"JJ, eyez in teh interwebz!"

edit on 15-10-2011 by JJDoggie84 because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   
I found another article that belongs in this conversation.


Dead Baby Pills
China is Reportedly Selling Pills Made Out of Dead Babies to Enhance Stamina

Supposedly, the television team paid a lot of money to get some of the pills, and when they tested them, found the pills’ contents were 99.7 percent human, and were also able to discern the babies’ gender from the powder, as well as found hair and nail remnants.

The dead babies used are supposedly used with the mother’s consent. The documentary will air August 6 on SBS TV South Korea.


Now this really is going too far. I don't know if it's true or not but I wouldn't be surprised. Maybe all those rumors about TPTB eating human fetus' are actually true.

Sick, just sick.....


EDIT: A video based on the article

edit on 15-10-2011 by MathiasAndrew because: add video



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by JJDoggie84
 


Have you heard about the Organ Farm


Source
In 1992, a small biotech company in Cambridge, England announced the creation of "Astrid," the world's first "transgenic" pig. Soon scientists were talking seriously about "organ farms" that would solve the world's chronic shortage of hearts, livers and other spare parts for human transplantation. A new breed of pigs, genetically-altered to be more human--and,so, less likely to be rejected by the immune systems of human recipients--was riding into town to save the day.

Now, five years after the first clinical human trials were first predicted to have begun, the most hopeful members of the xeno community still see trials several years away, and a number of scientists and scientific organizations are expressing new cautions. At the same time, a new possible solution to the organ shortage--creating organs from human stem cells, then cloning them--has emerged as a potentially more promising long-term solution. All of this is effecting the business of xeno: The science ultimately might prove workable, but will the money for the research hold out through more years of unprofitability and potential controversy?



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   
I would SO eat a turd burger atleast once.....just so I can say I did lmao.
2nd



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by billy197300
 


I had a friend in high school who used to take dares for cash. So once we were having a BBQ and we dared him to # in his hand, put it on a burger bun and eat it for $50.

Well, he tried to force a turd out but said he couldn't so he said he would stick his little finger in his butt and then lick it for $5.

He earned his money that day.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Soylent Green is one step closer to being a real reality..



posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Moshpet
 



I think the biggest hazard here is:

Who will be regulating it for food safety and so on? (Or if there will be any regulation what so ever....) We already see cases of food born illnesses being tracked to single farms or factory food producers. Now imagine some twit sneezing or dropping H5N1 deliberately into a 'vat' of this stuff... It's literally the perfect breeding environment for that sort of nightmare machinations.


As always,

the problem of "regulation" will only fit the glove of the financial agendas of the big corporations that sponsor these things.

The "test periods" sometimes go unregulated or partial.

Until they find a popular problem that justifies regulation.


Like they say:

"You are what you eat"


The Oxford scholars need to create some new words and definitions!

edit on Oct-16-2011 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Yeah I totally agree. The FDA doesn't have a great track record or a very trustworthy background in protecting the public from harmful products that get pushed through the trial tests in a matter of months after only under going a minimal number of tests done by the company itself.

Take the whole Aspartame fiasco and you will see how easy it is for big money to get their agenda accomplished. My question is..what's the real agenda in trying to develop food derived from human DNA ?



posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 01:58 AM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 



My question is..what's the real agenda in trying to develop food derived from human DNA ?



Probably just another resource to exploit.

The whole GM projects (vegetable/artificial based) have infiltrated the food supply already.

Human will be just another side dish.

The "source material" is an endless supply.

Perhaps "human" based GMO's will feed the cattle ?

The whole concept is wild...wild.



posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 02:42 AM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


OK, there's where it might get even more controversial though. Suppose that Monsanto or whoever gets a patent on this human DNA. Maybe then they have a basis to patent other forms of DNA and eventually a clone and might even try to go as far as making a patent on a human being. Then they will own life itself and no one will have a right to create a human without their consent.
yikes



posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by xuenchen
 


OK, there's where it might get even more controversial though. Suppose that Monsanto or whoever gets a patent on this human DNA. Maybe then they have a basis to patent other forms of DNA and eventually a clone and might even try to go as far as making a patent on a human being. Then they will own life itself and no one will have a right to create a human without their consent.
yikes


That my friend is the $64,000 question......or maybe a $64 million question.

Some companies have already attempted to set legal precedent.

They are using medical reasons as the gateway to "other" things.



Published: March 29, 2010

A federal judge on Monday struck down patents on two genes linked to breast and ovarian cancer. The decision, if upheld, could throw into doubt the patents covering thousands of human genes and reshape the law of intellectual property

United States District Court Judge Robert W. Sweet issued the 152-page decision, which invalidated seven patents related to the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, whose mutations have been associated with cancer.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York joined with individual patients and medical organizations to challenge the patents last May: they argued that genes, products of nature, fall outside of the realm of things that can be patented. The patents, they argued, stifle research and innovation and limit testing options.................


Judge Invalidates Human Gene Patent


Myriad Genetics, the company that holds the patents with the University of Utah Research Foundation, asked the court to dismiss the case, claiming that the work of isolating the DNA from the body transforms it and makes it patentable. Such patents, it said, have been granted for decades; the Supreme Court upheld patents on living organisms in 1980. In fact, many in the patent field had predicted the courts would throw out the suit.

Judge Sweet, however, ruled that the patents were “improperly granted” because they involved a “law of nature.” He said that many critics of gene patents considered the idea that isolating a gene made it patentable “a ‘lawyer’s trick’ that circumvents the prohibition on the direct patenting of the DNA in our bodies but which, in practice, reaches the same result.”



posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 03:34 AM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 

I sure hope that future judges will also not allow this kind of patent on human genes and DNA to ever get filed. It was already a huge mistake to have allowed them to patent the GMO seeds and plants. I can really see someone trying to work the laws in their favor to allow them to control the creation of humanity itself.

With all the joking aside there really is a controversial and important issue at the heart of all these kinds of endeavors. All it takes is for one of these crazy patents to get through and a few decades of gene or DNA to spread into the population. Just one part of a humans body becomes tainted or GM. If they own your liver or kidneys then they own you.





Human will be just another side dish. The "source material" is an endless supply.


That kind of reminds me of that old Twilight Zone episode


edit on 16-10-2011 by MathiasAndrew because: add video



posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 04:06 AM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 


You are 100% correct.

Of course, TPTB will ensure that the courts eventually side with the business interests.

They always have.

The propaganda efforts have already begun.

and that old Twilight Zone episode I remember well


They say many old movies and shows predicted the future with amazing accuracy !

(off topic for one moment)
This clip from a 1960's TV show (Laugh-In) was considered insane at the time!




posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 04:48 AM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Pretty amazing how all those old jokes came true isn't it.

On the whole issue of judges, there was a recent thread here on ATS that I was reading.

'No Food Rights' Judge quits to work for Monsanto law firm

This isn't a good sign.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1   >>

log in

join