Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

107 | 108 | 109

 ... 487

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

aksiokersa

aksiokersa

I'm lost
October 2004

MAY 01, 2005 10:29 PM

Holy Secret of NIMH!!!

gut666

gut666

Moreno Valley, CA
April 2005

MAY 01, 2005 11:50 PM

weres marlon brando when you need him?

MisterGraves

MisterGraves

Portland, OR
November 2003

MAY 01, 2005 11:58 PM

oldmoonmeetnew said:
When I see the phrase "human-animal hybrid" something far different than this comes to mind. If they're using it for medical purposes on either animals or humans, than I am for that. So long as they don't begin making beings more along the lines of what comes to mind when I hear that phrase, "human-animal hybrid". That would just be so un-needed.



When I hear the phrase "human-animal hybrid", I'm like WTF. Humans ARE animals.

Anyway. It comes full circle. We started discovering ourselves by disecting ourselves, then realized we could use other animals, then realized we couldn't really use other animals, so now try to make ourselves inside the shells of other animals. so it doesn't look like we're being barbaric.

nervejed

nervejed

Eau Claire, WI
March 2005

MAY 02, 2005 12:43 AM

i find it particularly rad that the sheep have human, or at least quasi-human brains. you'd want to procreate with sheep and also feel the shame of being known as a sheepfucker. hurray for modern medicine!

TrendSeven

TrendSeven

I'm lost
April 2005

MAY 02, 2005 05:33 AM

Can I be a transgenic too? Can anyone say "Dark Angel"?

remusisdying

remusisdying

Brighton, MA
March 2004

MAY 02, 2005 09:44 AM

xer0yne said:

When I hear the phrase "human-animal hybrid", I'm like WTF. Humans ARE animals.

Anyway. It comes full circle. We started discovering ourselves by disecting ourselves, then realized we could use other animals, then realized we couldn't really use other animals, so now try to make ourselves inside the shells of other animals. so it doesn't look like we're being barbaric.



actually, almost all early anatomy was based on that of animals (ie galen). the practice of dissection of humans didnt really come into 'popularity' until the renaissance.

PointBlank

PointBlank

New York, NY
November 2004

MAY 02, 2005 10:46 AM



[Edited on May 02, 2005 by PointBlank]

Helter

Helter

Chester, PA
OLD SKOOL

MAY 02, 2005 12:38 PM

TrendSeven said:
Can I be a transgenic too? Can anyone say "Dark Angel"?



You want to be a bad actor?

svnt

svnt

Grand Rapids, MI
January 2005

MAY 02, 2005 01:02 PM

don't any of these scientists watch movies? Seriously, some of that shit is going to start coming true. Probably not in a "Giant Killer Rats With Human Brains" sorta way, but more in a 28 Days later thing or something. I sure doesn't seem right. I tell you though. I should have been a scientist. Because these guys get to spend other peoples money doing the weirdess damn things. Seems kinda sick really. Yeah, that shit is just wrong. But that is what we get for not letting them clone humans. At least someone watched Bladerunner and saw what a bad idea that would be.

PointBlank

PointBlank

New York, NY
November 2004

MAY 02, 2005 01:07 PM

svnt said:
don't any of these scientists watch movies? Seriously, some of that shit is going to start coming true. Probably not in a "Giant Killer Rats With Human Brains" sorta way, but more in a 28 Days later thing or something. I sure doesn't seem right. I tell you though. I should have been a scientist. Because these guys get to spend other peoples money doing the weirdess damn things. Seems kinda sick really. Yeah, that shit is just wrong. But that is what we get for not letting them clone humans. At least someone watched Bladerunner and saw what a bad idea that would be.


Your grasp of both science and Bladerunner's plot are tenuous at best.

svnt

svnt

Grand Rapids, MI
January 2005

MAY 02, 2005 01:09 PM

Oh, and another thing. Anyone else think that maybe all this medicine and medical research and such is weakening the human race? Did nature really intend for us to live into our 80s and 90s on a regular basis? Isn't rather anti-Darwin to try to fix all of these broken people? Then they take their weak genes and breed. That isn't good for anyone. I really think that is why people are getting dumber and fatter. I'm not calling for the extermination of the weak or anything like that. It just seems counter productive for us all really. What happens to survival of the fittest when Dr. Normal gives us all a magic crutch. Maybe we shouldn't cure cancer. Or allot of other diseases. Just a though.

svnt

svnt

Grand Rapids, MI
January 2005

MAY 02, 2005 01:12 PM

PointBlank said:


Your grasp of both science and Bladerunner's plot are tenuous at best.

All I'm saying is that Bladerunner covered the fact that we would likely abuse cloned humans.

Cassiel

Cassiel

Aurora, CO
September 2004

MAY 02, 2005 02:04 PM

svnt said:

PointBlank said:


Your grasp of both science and Bladerunner's plot are tenuous at best.



All I'm saying is that Bladerunner covered the fact that we would likely abuse cloned humans.

They were androids...replicants, if you will

BurningKrome

BurningKrome

San Jose, CA
April 2005

MAY 02, 2005 05:54 PM

"They said they will destroy any mice that exhibit humanlike behavior. "

Ok. I understand the concept, but once they exhibit human-like behavior; isn't it a little late by then? Now you're not just killing a mouse, you might be killing a human...um...mouse.

"Quick! Act stupid...the lab guys are coming! You remember what happened to Stan!!"

svnt

svnt

Grand Rapids, MI
January 2005

MAY 03, 2005 05:03 AM

Cassiel said:

svnt said:

PointBlank said:


Your grasp of both science and Bladerunner's plot are tenuous at best.



All I'm saying is that Bladerunner covered the fact that we would likely abuse cloned humans.



They were androids...replicants, if you will

But they where genetical engineered. And they had life spans. And they were used as slaves. So pretty much it still makes the point.

[Edited on May 03, 2005 8:04AM]

BurningKrome

BurningKrome

San Jose, CA
April 2005

MAY 03, 2005 08:47 PM

svnt said:
Oh, and another thing. Anyone else think that maybe all this medicine and medical research and such is weakening the human race? Did nature really intend for us to live into our 80s and 90s on a regular basis? Isn't rather anti-Darwin to try to fix all of these broken people? Then they take their weak genes and breed. That isn't good for anyone. I really think that is why people are getting dumber and fatter. I'm not calling for the extermination of the weak or anything like that. It just seems counter productive for us all really. What happens to survival of the fittest when Dr. Normal gives us all a magic crutch. Maybe we shouldn't cure cancer. Or allot of other diseases. Just a though.



Some would argue that it is actually a PART of the natural evolutionary process.

The human race goes through a short “weakening” period (you could argue, perhaps, 300 years tops out of at least 200,000 years of quantitative homo sapiens sapiens) which then presses medical technology to research the ensuing health problems until the genetic codes are cracked. Once cracked, genetic health issues become a thing of the past.

Research develops solutions only as fast as the problem presses itself. The problem with discussing “natural” evolution is we have no reference basis for what happens to a species once it becomes sentient. It could be quite normal for all sentient life to destroy their home world, move off-world, after which the pressure that forced them to save themselves also gives them the self-discipline to protect the new home. As natural as a bird being pushed out of the nest.

The problem is, we won’t know until we encounter a number of other sentient species to use as a reference datum.


Serukoda

Serukoda

I'm lost
February 2007

MAR 26, 2007 09:36 PM




Some would argue that it is actually a PART of the natural evolutionary process.

The human race goes through a short "weakening" period (you could argue, perhaps, 300 years tops out of at least 200,000 years of quantitative homo sapiens sapiens) which then presses medical technology to research the ensuing health problems until the genetic codes are cracked. Once cracked, genetic health issues become a thing of the past.

Research develops solutions only as fast as the problem presses itself. The problem with discussing "natural" evolution is we have no reference basis for what happens to a species once it becomes sentient. It could be quite normal for all sentient life to destroy their home world, move off-world, after which the pressure that forced them to save themselves also gives them the self-discipline to protect the new home. As natural as a bird being pushed out of the nest.

The problem is, we won't know until we encounter a number of other sentient species to use as a reference datum.



This is a very credible point, I like where you take the issue; and I think that there is a good chance that this idea is correct - that all this crazy shit we are up to as a culture is part of a natural course. The natural/not natural debate is played out I think; its moot.

But there is a different perspective of the issue that I see as pivotal. So what if it is natural to spread over the earth like a plague, and dominate and control the entire environment. If we do this, if we devaluate everything in this universe aside from our culture - we end up very alone. Its like the fucking Lorax. I remember that cartoon as visceral in its presentation of a world where its just us; everything else is gone after we use and empty it all of meaning. I see our culture as heading toward this point - maybe literally - more importantly, as a mindset I think that we are already there - at least those of us who are Americans.

It is certainly possible that being the biggest kid on the block places us in a position to have our way with the universe (or sheeple, or anything, really) but where will we be without that universe that spawned us?

I don't know... maybe these are just the concerns of someone who by random chance loved the natural world around him - and that therefore this perspective is biased. But I do know one thing - which side I will always be on. A universe (or planet, or forest, or whatever) full of nothing but people-centered and people dominated stuff? Fuck that. Even if I am more powerful than the the sun itself, I respect it enough as a thing not to fuck with it. There's been a lot of times I've been in some situation on the street, I meet some guy who could kick my ass like he was breathing. When I discover that person has self control, and respect for me - my respect for that person goes through the roof. That is powerful.

And that argument about if you or your mom or whatever was going to die? We were meant to die. What, are you chicken? In that world you want to use and abuse, there's something. Go ahead and use it up - you'll find yourself empty later.

So I guess what I'm saying is - we should choose our evolution - rather than allowing ourselves to become by accident some kind of swarm-domino effect. Just because the universe lets us do it doesn't mean its our best option.



BATTY
We're not computers, Sebastian,
we're physical.

Pris perks up proudly.

PRIS
I think, therefore I am.

fountainofdreams

fountainofdreams

Batavia, IL
January 2005

MAR 26, 2007 09:51 PM

thrash242 said:

funnyman said:

hermetica said:

One_Pure_Thought said:
Oh man, if I see a mouse start drawing plans for escape or world domination...fuck destroying them...I'll talk to them



I almost feel obliged to say
'I, for one, welcome our new mutant mous/sheep/human overlords'

but thats just so.. Boards..
biggrin



YES!!!! 2 amazing references combined into one: hitchhiker's guide AND half life 2! w00t! Go mice!



Uh, don't you mean "simpsons"? I don't remember anything resembling that in HHGTTG or HL2.



maybe the mice...but yea, that's a simpsons quote.

MarcyBeth

MarcyBeth

Ocala, FL
July 2006

MAR 27, 2007 08:18 AM

this is a baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa'd idea.

NickFaust

NickFaust

USA
April 2004

MAR 27, 2007 08:29 AM

Cassiel said:
Now the question is raised: What if the human consciousness got trapped inside a sheep's head?



I am not sure why we are resurrecting 2 year old threads, but I just want to say here, that ever since the 2004 election I have pretty much been convinced that this had already happened.

How else does one explain the re-election of a moron?

MarcyBeth

MarcyBeth

Ocala, FL
July 2006

MAR 27, 2007 08:55 AM

whoa. this thread is 2 years old. lmfao.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next