| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Destro
Netherlands1206 Posts
On May 22 2010 08:27 DallasTx wrote: Yeah, I really asked for a debate over god. Nice job trying to make yourself seem smarter by being an atheist though. you really did. It would be like me jumping into a thread about them finding noah's ark and just saying "duh i wish people would just drop this fairytale bs" | ||
|
dcberkeley
Canada844 Posts
| ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
| ||
|
Destro
Netherlands1206 Posts
| ||
|
Romantic
United States1844 Posts
On May 22 2010 08:09 DallasTx wrote: I really dislike man playing the role of god :/ He wasn't that great. 2000 years of civilization and we've almost caught up. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11567 Posts
On May 22 2010 08:35 On_Slaught wrote: Doesn't this allow scientists to bypass stem cells? Usually you need cells from a fetus to have cells to work with but it seems this would allow us to create advanced solutions without relying upon the volatile issue that is stem cell research. If stems cells are volatile, this would be like putting nitroglycerin in a blender | ||
|
Destro
Netherlands1206 Posts
On May 22 2010 08:56 FragKrag wrote: If stems cells are volatile, this would be like putting nitroglycerin in a blender until someone vaguely mentions that a human phetus may be very beneficial to research and the catholic church goes apeshit, after all, those are perfectly good future alter boy-toys | ||
|
Three
Japan278 Posts
| ||
|
Slakter
Sweden1947 Posts
| ||
|
Destro
Netherlands1206 Posts
| ||
|
aced
United States1 Post
| ||
|
ArKaDo
France121 Posts
What is life is NOT a biological question, it's a philosophical one... that's the problem in my point of view. Seriously, the idea of "improving evolution", and "improving people" is very very scary. Anyway LOL at the guy saying you actually need to know biology to say this is dangerous : you are morons. And LOL at the guy saying "improving evolution" is the same as medecine... Can't you see that it is a dangerous idea just to "improve evolution"; cauz you need to define what you need to improve (need two legs? change dna so that people are not violent? just read Huxley guys...). PS: when the guy is saying "playing god" he is not referring to god like the christian or islamic god or anything (well maybe he is but that is not the point), he is referring to an entity who is omnipotent: who knows everything and can control everything. That's not the case of humanity and will never be. When you look at the possibilities of synthetic life, you can also (if you have a bit imagination) see all the bad that could come from such technologies. I will just quote spider man since that's the kind of quote you like you science freek: with great power come great responsabilities. | ||
|
gyth
657 Posts
Seriously, the idea of "improving evolution", and "improving people" is very very scary. Thats the one thing I find comforting about this. We'll be so fail versus evolution that anything that did escape the cleanroom would just find itself the lowest rung of the food chain. (at least for a few decades) | ||
|
ThunderChunky
United States24 Posts
On May 22 2010 08:18 BHC wrote: That over simplification = cloning as well lol What made this special is that they determined what genes to put in the organism´s genome. ie they can determine everthing the organism is capable of doing. It's really mostly a technological advancement and a proof of principle. They synthesized an entire bacterial genome from scratch and transferred it into a host cell. They did not invent this genome, it's a modified version of what is found in nature. One of their goals is to determine what are the minimal sets of genes required for life. Now they will trim down this synthetic genome and determine what is needed. He wants to create a bare bones genome to use as a base to create all sorts of different functional organisms. | ||
|
ArKaDo
France121 Posts
On May 22 2010 10:57 gyth wrote: Thats the one thing I find comforting about this. We'll be so fail versus evolution that anything that did escape the cleanroom would just find itself the lowest rung of the food chain. (at least for a few decades) Some biologist made an exposition in my country about how human will evolve. There are many possibilities, but some says that we will not evolve anymore because our technologies will prevent us to do so(in some models we actually go weaker in terms of physical power, loosing hair and things). So we do not need to "improve ourselves", because we have tools around us that permit us a better control of our surroundings. And again, what will you improve? Bigger boobs FOR EVERYBODY!? | ||
|
bearbuddy
3442 Posts
Cool accomplishment, nonetheless. | ||
|
ThunderChunky
United States24 Posts
On May 22 2010 08:35 On_Slaught wrote: Doesn't this allow scientists to bypass stem cells? Usually you need cells from a fetus to have cells to work with but it seems this would allow us to create advanced solutions without relying upon the volatile issue that is stem cell research. This has nothing to do with stem cells. These are bacterial cells several orders of magnitude less complex. This bacteria has a genome that consists of a single chromosome of about 1 million bp, by contrast the human genome is 46 chromosomes and totals 6 billion bp. Methods to "bypass" stem cells already exist. We can now reprogram ordinary skin cells into embryonic stem cells, but their are a few caveats. | ||
|
ThunderChunky
United States24 Posts
On May 22 2010 11:01 bearbuddy wrote: I'm surprised that they have only been able to do this now, given how much we already know about solid phase synthesis and other techniques. Cool accomplishment, nonetheless. DNA synthesis technology is still far behind nature. In this project they had to use yeast cells to stitch many small fragments of the the synthetic DNA together. | ||
|
neVern
United States115 Posts
On May 22 2010 10:23 aced wrote: would this be able to cure aids? Are you kidding me? A lot of scientists don't even believe HIV exists. AIDS is hardly understood. | ||
|
mmp
United States2130 Posts
On May 22 2010 10:23 aced wrote: would this be able to cure aids? So quick to nuke... Craig Venter mentioned in his press announcement combating HIV as an objective on the horizon. I'd give it 30-50 years. | ||
| ||
|
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Mixu vs TBD
Spirit vs TBD
Clem vs TBD
Patches Events
OSC
Afreeca Starleague
Soma vs Shuttle
BeSt vs Rush
WardiTV Weekly
Monday Night Weeklies
Afreeca Starleague
Leta vs ggaemo
Jaedong vs Queen
GSL
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
