Absolutely, and mutations really aren't all that common (harmful ones) and in fact sometimes mutations occur due to adaptations needed to survive. For example the celts at one time around 60-70 generations ago had tiny amounts of iron in their diet so their body's compensated through a mutation that allowed for the body to code more codons to form proteins that increase absorption of iron.
Mutations aren't all that bad, sometimes they're helpful (Although it is unfortunate that that mutation ha become harmful due to the ease of access to iron today, although at the same time it is much rarer, showing that the body understands how to adapt well to conditions).
But of course experimentation as always, and safe experimentation at that.
It meant something. I'm guessing most people that read it understood it quite well.
I think its more likely that this wont happen do to sheer happening. This will be engineered and plotted out. It will start with walled cities and end with technology = undefeatable sorcery to the uninitiated. Then eventually one of the "Gods" of the city will go rogue and share technology with all or earth, destroy all technology and reset, or destroy the earth.Read a book back in the late 60s that explained why not. I believe it was by Desmond Morris but I could be remembering that wrong. What really stuck with me over the years is the truth of it. The author's premise was that we had reached a point where technological change had outpaced our society's ability to cope with (live with). And that this gulf between tech and understanding of that tech would greatly widen in upcoming decades until a fracture point was reached or an extinction level disaster was created by the gulf.
yes sometimes they can be helpful. in the majority of the time they are harmful or lethal.
that is why this needs to be studied throughly before they start doing anything else.
plus they would need to know what would happen if they actually put it in a live host. making it isolated is one thing injecting it into a live host is something else.
that could have disasterous results.
Someone is probably going to bash me for this but why not experiment this on criminals convicted for things like mass murder and mass rape? Not like we need them anymore, perfect beings to test this on, think of it as hell for what they did in case hell doesn't exist
Because how many comic-book supervillans started when the government decided to experiment on prisoners?Someone is probably going to bash me for this but why not experiment this on criminals convicted for things like mass murder and mass rape? Not like we need them anymore, perfect beings to test this on, think of it as hell for what they did in case hell doesn't exist
yes because we want to create geneticly mutated murders and rapists.
Hahahaha, they have life sentences, they wnt go anywhere, plus security is insane for the experiments. No genetic mutation realistically by this kind of experimentation would be able to withstand huge brunt force. This isn't a movie, dispose of the criminals after testing is complete, they're good for nothing but results, afterwards they can go in the earth.
They lost all their rights when they broke the laws in such a way anyway.
Because how many comic-book supervillans started when the government decided to experiment on prisoners?
:2razz:
depends they could make zombie criminals. i mean that is how all the zombie movies start anyway some scientist thinking that he is cool makes a stupid DNA mutation that he accidently infects himself or someone else gets infected.
yes i know it is the movies but what they are messing with is real and can have unexpected results.
It will never get that far. War would erupt during the debate over what color these new people should be.
Science is easy, sociology is hard.
No doubt about it, but if you actually read upon what the effects are of the new DNA nucleotide bases you would understand that it essentially helps create more codons to create more proteins which allows for a richer internal environment inside someone. It doesn't take some random person and turn him into a 10 foot tall invincible giant that can withstand 50 Cals. and 120MM smoothbore cannons.
Point in case, get your mind out of sci-fi, should something go wrong the sheer firepower of security will handle it.
if you haven't noticed i am being a bit sarcastic.
I am just urging caution. as what it is suppose to do doesn't mean that it will do that.
it has nothing to do with sci-fi other than mixing a bit of humor into it.
I think it is interesting but more research is needed.
Well, I think if we don't wipe ourselves out that via technology, humans will be as close to immortality as possible. And think of it. It was done by humans...just humans. :shock: I love it!
Science didn't help Christopher Reeves.
Except for, you know, keeping him alive for years after his spinal cord injury.
Science didn't help Christopher Reeves.
Hahahaha, they have life sentences, they wnt go anywhere, plus security is insane for the experiments. No genetic mutation realistically by this kind of experimentation would be able to withstand huge brunt force. This isn't a movie, dispose of the criminals after testing is complete, they're good for nothing but results, afterwards they can go in the earth.
They lost all their rights when they broke the laws in such a way anyway.
That's not what the picture depicts, it shows boys running. So you support an exaggerated lie. I'm not surprise.
Close to immortality?
**** that
Let's strive for absolute biological immortality!!!! FOR HUMANITY! I don't care if there may be other life forms in this universe. All I care is that we show them our superiority, and that they bow to us, the strongest species of the universe.
Considering there are galaxies eons older than ours and that the stars closer to the galactic core are hundreds of millions/billions older than Sol, that's unlikely.
Gawd.
It was hyperbole, I thought, the first time but now you sound half-serious.
Dead serious, criminals should have absolutely no rights depending on the crime.
How does one get such a touching, child-like faith in the state that they'd give it that kind of power? I wouldn't give the government the right to capital punishment- I don't trust the beast enough.
How do you know you're 'liberal' with that level of confidence in authority?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?