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.
Now, MIT researchers have developed tiny gold particles that can home in on tumors, and then, by absorbing energy from near-infrared light and emitting it as heat, destroy tumors with minimal side effects.
Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by Raelsatu
Well, why do you think gold is so rare on this planet? Maybe they already got most of it and left with it sometime way back in the past?
Originally posted by squarehead666
reply to post by Raelsatu
But crap at art.
2nd. (& that's a first! )
For arguments sake, name a known asteroid that has a high gold content.
The most detailed study of an asteroid shows that it contains precious metals worth at least $20,000bn. The data were collected last December by the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (Near) spacecraft which passed close to the asteroid Eros.
If Eros is typical of stony meteorites, then it contains about 3% metal. With the known abundance's of metals in meteorites, even a very cautious estimate suggests 20,000 million tonnes of aluminium along with similar amounts of gold, platinum and other rarer metals. In the 2,900 cubic kms of Eros, there is more aluminium, gold, silver, zinc and other base and precious metals than have ever been excavated in history or indeed, could ever be excavated from the upper layers of the Earth's crust. That is just in one asteroid and not a very large one at that. There are thousands of asteroids out there.
Name a celestial body that could support 100-500K individuals and mining operations.
Anyone ever tried to mine a small object in zero gravity?
A lot of these poster's counter arguments are just as ignorant and impractical as the original premise of genetically engineering biological machines to do work, you know casue its not like we bio-engineer bacteria and other organic materials to do things machine can't or anything...... I mean we would never change a biological entity at the genetic level to solve a problem when we can use wires and metals to do the same thing at higher costs right??
I mean if you were sooooo advanced you would just use robots to do EVERYTHING cause like it would be easy to build intelligent AI's to operate in constantly changing circumstances in harsh extremely dusty conditions and make self contained filter systems to keep circuits clean all while keeping your imaging devices able to detect the difference between dust and rocks that were self replicating and essentially free resources right?? I mean we're aliens screw biology!
Not that I buy into sitchin but man, it's pretty obvious alot of you people have never taken a physics class or understand action - reaction.
Certainly no early settlers ever mined easily accessible gold veins practically exposed at the surface similarly to these ancient mines with pick axes and some pans.....If you think about it landing on a planet for whatever reason and then leveraging a pre-existing resource of humans for labor is about the most efficient way you could possibly do this. I mean humans never used to use natural resources like horses as a primary form of transportaion until like 1920 because I mean, we'd just build a car right?
Originally posted by Raelsatu
Originally posted by squarehead666
reply to post by Raelsatu
But crap at art.
2nd. (& that's a first! )
Not necessarily. If the cyborg employed an advanced form of cognitive computing --- likened to a hybrid of the human brain, while able leverage the raw processing power of classical computing --- it would be sentient. Not only able to mimic artistic styles, but perhaps use its information center in conjunction with subjective experience.edit on 16-1-2013 by Raelsatu because: (no reason given)
Impervious to disease, pathogens; containing no genetic 'flaws'.
Originally posted by squarehead666
Show me one.....One that wasn't first designed by animal intelligence.
There's an inherent elegance to organics.....From a high-tech enough perspective, where do you draw the line between machine and organism anyway?
Originally posted by Panic2k11
reply to post by Raelsatu
Agree, but I took the general view that a robot is an electro-mechanical machine that is guided by a computer program or electronic circuitry. An automaton.
Even mechanical creations have most of those, even genetic flaws may be present (depending on how the software is created especially the AI) and biological machines may have less of those than you think. Most may even be design features.
Originally posted by WaterBottle
Scientist and researcher Michael Tellinger discussed archaeological and genetic evidence in support of Zecharia Sitchin's work showing that the Anunnaki created humans through genetic experimentation to serve as slaves for gold mining.
www.coasttocoastam.com...
This guy has no credibility. Stichen has been proved wrong over and over again.