The Transformation

***acacia*** · May 2nd, 2009 7:28 PM

+ YouTube Video

Well, this would certainly go along way toward eliminating disease and deformity.

Genetic selection and manipulation to produce less sickly humans.

A new race; a quantum leap.

But first, they will have to cull the herd to stop the breeding.

***James Random*** · May 3rd, 2009 12:48 AM

Annnd.....this what what to do with politics, exactly? Might I introduce you to our science forum?

***Abyssal_Worm*** · May 3rd, 2009 1:20 AM

Originally Posted by James Random

Annnd.....this what what to do with politics, exactly? Might I introduce you to our science forum?

The political ramifications of conducting such research perhaps?

How would it be guaranteed that "low income" families won't see their children's DNA being altered to result in lower intelligence while wealthy families can pay extra for "enhanced features"? Government regulation could result in a real mess since they can't even get welfare to the people who really need it while people who just breed like rabbits get loads of money.

This would be a dangerous road to go down. Especially when you consider all the hanky-panky that goes on with taxes. Throw in genetics, and we could see a return of the concept of "Master Race."

***medicvet*** · May 3rd, 2009 1:57 AM

How would it be guaranteed that "low income" families won't see their children's DNA being altered to result in lower intelligence while wealthy families can pay extra for "enhanced features"?

And by the same token, it could also be altered to make for more muscular strength to be better equipped to do menial tasks. It's a slippery road to travel down there...

**lycanox** · May 3rd, 2009 6:06 AM

As long they aren't voting on it in congress.

This is more an ethical debate about genetic manipulation. Than an political one.

***acacia*** · May 3rd, 2009 12:09 PM

Thanks, Lycanox. You may even want to move me again-- (conspiracy?)--before I am done!

It seems that these kids are being gently indoctrinated into the new agenda for population control.

What will be the reasons given for this? In a few years will they be told that the world economic problems were due to an overburdened health care system as well as over population?

What happens when this generation realizes procreation is only allowed through government permission?

What happens when they realize they will not be able or allowed to propagate?

Will designer babies may be manufactured in a lab? Will they be reared in an institutional environment?

Will the rest of the population be sterilized?

Are kids asking these questions now or are they just too"wowed" and accepting of this new science?

***Mezurashi*** · May 3rd, 2009 12:25 PM

we're just putting our hand into what has previously been a roulette wheel of hit or miss ...

back in the late 1990's I took part in helping an anti-GMO group trying to write up their challenge to the courts in order to try and fight the burdgeoning Monsanto Beast. the problem was, they (the anti-GMO group) found my 'language' too wishy washy and legalese for their liking. so they 'fired' me and wrote up their own challenge, which was promptly thrown out of court for being absurd and ridiculous.

the short version is, they wanted to 'light a fire' so the language of their challenge was mostly rhetoric of the 'drum banger' style.

problem with this was that their 'definition' of 'illegal and unethical' genetic modification was worded such that Having Babies Would Be Made Illegal.

in their POV, Any form of genetic modification to consciously produce a new strain of DNA based on the combination or modification of previously existing strains was Wrong.

they got rid of the specific referrents to scientific modification, laboratory environmental experiments and such. hell, by the wording of their challenge Gregor Mendel was evil and did the wrong thing cross breeding peas.

by their wording then things like Broccoli, Wheat, Cabbage, Cauliflower, Celery and even Lawns would become 'Genetically suspect' and therefore illegal.

no wonder they got tossed out of court ...

the whole issue I see here isn't the Ethical aspects of Genetic Modification - every single time two people decide to make a baby (with all the hopes for a healthy and happy child) they are engaging in 'Personal Transformational Genetics.'

and if these parents decide they want to eradicate a certain gene which carries the triggers for, say, Lupus or MS, who are we to say they are wrong? would you want to take a chance the child you're bringing into the world might die horribly from a degenerative disease?

the 'problem' here comes with the 'aftermarket improvements' idea where instead of simply eradicating 'bad' genes people want to start 'adding' so called good genes to 'improve' their child in vitro.

sure we all want to have bright, strong and vital progeny, but at what cost?

what I see is that should such 'improvement' therapy become widespread (assumptions of legality here) eventually there will be 'one big mistake' and so a whole bunch of expectant parents who had some 'add-on' injected iunto their fetus discover that the gene codes didn't take properly and they were now looking at medical abortion or giving birth to a dying monster.

in that sense, there is the Natural Order Negative Feedback Loop to keep things in line. should such an 'error' occur the parents who suffered from it would band together and we'd see all sorts of reactions, from Gov't Intervention with even more restrictive legislation (which some would say should have been there in the first place) all the way to having clinics burned and doctors targeted for assasination (as is the case today with Abortion Clinics).

though it is terrible to consider the pain and suffering of people who are caught up in such a situation, I can't see the problem as a huge one. this has it's own self-enforcing negative feedback loop built in and because it's about People and not Corn or Lawns there will likely be far more active participation in the process than we see today with the Monsanto Monster spreading it's tentacles over the agricultural world.

man I'm feeling wordy ... must be the antihistamines ..

***acacia*** · May 3rd, 2009 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by Mezurashi

man I'm feeling wordy ... must be the antihistamines ..

I am always glad to hear from you because you seem to think deeply on these matters...whether or not we agree.

The idea of GM people sounds good in theory, but I think it has a great potential for misuse and mistakes in unchartered terrority.

It will change the course of the human race, that's for sure!

***uki*** · May 3rd, 2009 1:19 PM

Originally Posted by acacia

The idea of GM people sounds good in theory,

it looks horrible at this stage of its current growth an advancement.

but I think it has a great potential for misuse and mistakes in unchartered terrority.

yeah... genetic manipulation has never occurred within the history of the human race.

It will change the course of the human race, that's for sure!

CONGRATULATIONS ACACIA!!!
you are this weeks grand prize winner of the UNDERSTATEMENT award.

***acacia*** · May 16th, 2009 8:43 AM

Lycanox....this might even fit the section on religion!
How about this:

Paul said that "flesh and blood cannot enter the Kingdom".

Christians seem to assume that this means the body will change to some sort of spiritual form (like ghosts?). But as we see the changes coming about, could this utterance really have been describing a quantum leap of human transformation....an embodiment of human and machine?

Many people ascribe these words to Jesus. But I find no evidence that Jesus said such as this.

***weederbro*** · May 16th, 2009 7:53 PM

'Paul said that "flesh and blood cannot enter the Kingdom".'

I think what this means is that if you 'walk in the flesh' rather than 'in the Spirit', you will not enter the Kingdom.

***uki*** · May 17th, 2009 5:15 AM

Originally Posted by weederbro

'Paul said that "flesh and blood cannot enter the Kingdom".'

I think what this means is that if you 'walk in the flesh' rather than 'in the Spirit', you will not enter the Kingdom.

the interesting truth popped in my head while reading this... come and see.

duality is abounding in the scripture... at the time of the end here are a few examples...

coming of christ and the rise of the anti-christ.

the mark of the beast and the seal(mark on the forehead) of the spirit.

rise of wars, pestilence and disease... coming of planetary peace and harmony.

one man enters the kingdom of spirit... another man enters the kingdom of flesh.

***acacia*** · May 18th, 2009 6:01 PM

How about the scripture "you don't put new wine in old bottles."

Basically that tells me that the old folks will be annhiliated. According to plans in the works---those who are old, handicapped, wounded, etc. are just too expensive to keep around. They are considered to be what has overburdened the health care system and they are not productive members of society as are others. (Not my opinion, mind you.)

Once they get rid of the older people, the younger generation loses its history. And those who would warn about the misuse of such technology will be gone. Once the NWO can achieve that, it will be easier to convince the younger ones to undergo chipping and then to sell them on the idea of a better way to breed...in the lab.

The importance of this scripture I used is because many people are expecting the New Theocratic Kingdom of God government to bring miraculous healing and restoration. Some religions teach that people, once resurrected, will return to live on the earth. I do not see this happening. Again, no new inventions or medical advancements for old wine sacks.

***New Wine*** · May 18th, 2009 9:07 PM

Or it could just mean: The old wine skins of Judaism and legalism could not contain the dynamic new faith of Christianity and freedom...in the context of the time the words were spoken.