Biotech and the end of dying
- Thread starter Casey
- Start date
No I'm not advocating selective use, but clearly it would be more benefit for some people to be able to utilize this technology than the others.
It's all well and good to try and be diplomatic and against selective use, but if you had to choose one person to benefit from this, would you choose someone like Einstein or the drunken homeless bum on the corner?
It's all well and good to try and be diplomatic and against selective use, but if you had to choose one person to benefit from this, would you choose someone like Einstein or the drunken homeless bum on the corner?
Obviously having great minds, philosophers and humanitarians' lifespan increased sounds beautiful, but like every new technology, the people you don't want touching it get a hold of it, sadly.
I'd like to see Casey rocking out in long jons and old man suspenders when he's 200 years old though. He'd still be able to work the crowd.
I'd like to see Casey rocking out in long jons and old man suspenders when he's 200 years old though. He'd still be able to work the crowd.
First of all, I don't buy it. I'm not saying it's impossible, nobody's just ever been able to tell me how it works. It's a gene(s), so if you find that gene and remove it or replace it (or do *something* to it) you will no longer age? I don't buy it. I don't think these people fully understand how this works, I think they have found certain genes that seem to have something to do with aging based on experiments with mice, and now they think they may make advances within the field because they want to make advances in the field with all their heart. Then some cocky asshole goes out and says "yeah in 20 years I'm sure you can live forever". Well in 2015 we were supposed to have the first people living on the moon. I actually specifically remember this from the mid 90s. By 2015-2025 we would be living on the moon, lmao. Let's not think about how people in the 70s pictured us having jetpacks and cubes that turn into food when you microwave them. I just don't buy it, it's not like making a faster microprocessor chip for a PC, it's like being god. I don't think it can be done. Waiting to be proven wrong with a video of an 80 year old person that looks 30, though. When I see that movie, I'll buy that scientists can prolong someone's life.
That said, I'm also strongly against the idea that only some people should have their life prolonged, and I'm definitely against the idea of everyone having access to the possibility. I don't think it should be sold as a service either because that would surely cause civil unrest, and is immoral. Sure, ideally I'd rather give infinite life to Einstein than a homeless bum but that's a purely hypothetical speculation. I'd also rather kill Hitler than my mother but luckily that's a completely irrelevant problem for me and would be pointless to mention lol. I think this kind of research should be illegal imo, but that's just me.
Another thing that no one seems to consider is that we have no idea what happens to a person that doesn't age. To me the concept seems impossible because no energy can be sustained forever. Think about it. It doesn't make sense that you don't age. Skin cells die every day, should they stop dying? Won't they become shitty over time then? It's like a battery you never have to recharge, it doesn't seem possible does it? How would a "modified" person look after 50 years? Like an 8 year old? If you think practically about it, it doesn't make a lot of sense. How will it affect further generations? What if there are degenerations as a result of tampering? I don't think this is such great big news at all, it's scary, unfeasible and egocentric/retarded/no consideration of the long-term consequences not only for our species but for our planet and every other living thing on it (by those who are encouraging the research.)
That said, I'm also strongly against the idea that only some people should have their life prolonged, and I'm definitely against the idea of everyone having access to the possibility. I don't think it should be sold as a service either because that would surely cause civil unrest, and is immoral. Sure, ideally I'd rather give infinite life to Einstein than a homeless bum but that's a purely hypothetical speculation. I'd also rather kill Hitler than my mother but luckily that's a completely irrelevant problem for me and would be pointless to mention lol. I think this kind of research should be illegal imo, but that's just me.
Another thing that no one seems to consider is that we have no idea what happens to a person that doesn't age. To me the concept seems impossible because no energy can be sustained forever. Think about it. It doesn't make sense that you don't age. Skin cells die every day, should they stop dying? Won't they become shitty over time then? It's like a battery you never have to recharge, it doesn't seem possible does it? How would a "modified" person look after 50 years? Like an 8 year old? If you think practically about it, it doesn't make a lot of sense. How will it affect further generations? What if there are degenerations as a result of tampering? I don't think this is such great big news at all, it's scary, unfeasible and egocentric/retarded/no consideration of the long-term consequences not only for our species but for our planet and every other living thing on it (by those who are encouraging the research.)
You think it should be illegal? You think trying to improve life and benefit the human race should be illegal? And you mention god too. Why I am not surprised at that 
Second of all, these are real studies supported by evidence, and you sit there and go "I don't buy it". Well tough luck buddy, it's real and it's happening.
As far as what people said about where humans might be at in 2015, 30 years ago or whatever, most of that shit was fantasy made up in people's heads. This is REAL LIFE SHIT. You do realize they've already figured out teleportation right? Yep, they made an object (albeit a very small one) completely vanish from one place and re-appear in another.
With that being a possibility, the concept of reversing a typical human process isn't so far fetched.
Anyway, I'm all for it.
Skin cells wouldn't become shitty if they stopped dying. They don't slowly degenerate until they die, in fact just before they die they are as functional as they've always been. There's a time based body reaction that kills them.
It's not purely hypothetical speculation because this is happening whether you like it or not.
Second of all, these are real studies supported by evidence, and you sit there and go "I don't buy it". Well tough luck buddy, it's real and it's happening.
As far as what people said about where humans might be at in 2015, 30 years ago or whatever, most of that shit was fantasy made up in people's heads. This is REAL LIFE SHIT. You do realize they've already figured out teleportation right? Yep, they made an object (albeit a very small one) completely vanish from one place and re-appear in another.
With that being a possibility, the concept of reversing a typical human process isn't so far fetched.
Anyway, I'm all for it.
Skin cells wouldn't become shitty if they stopped dying. They don't slowly degenerate until they die, in fact just before they die they are as functional as they've always been. There's a time based body reaction that kills them.
It's not purely hypothetical speculation because this is happening whether you like it or not.
I disagree with this kind of logic. I know it was just a general comment and you probably didn't invest all your energy in picking the words.
And this also is not addressed at you Duke, it's just general. My impression is that a lot of people have this preconceived notion that the outer borders of our technological capacity will keep growing exponentially. And by that logic, at some point in the future we will have found a way to make car engines that use a dl per 100 miles. We'll have cars that can travel in a million kilometres an hour. We will eventually have 2000-core CPUs with two hundred billion gazillion gigahertz on them, and regular household PCs will have 14448gb ram. I can go on. It's a naive and silly way to think of technological advances. Just because we came from one point and advanced to another point, that doesn't mean we can keep advancing infinitely. Everything has its limits, also technology and the universe. Which is why I think this research will hit the point where we have identified the genes that are related to aging, but where all our attempts at controlling them have failed.
If you imagine a skin cell and all the atoms it consists of, and all the quarks that make up the nucleons of said atoms, and consider the fact that nucleons have a charge (or that a nucleon can behave in different ways depending on various factors, rather), then saying that "it's a gene" is a simplification of something that is larger than what we can understand. Considering this, I don't understand how a person can think we will be able to prolong life within X years. What is he basing his estimation on? It came from his ass.
And this also is not addressed at you Duke, it's just general. My impression is that a lot of people have this preconceived notion that the outer borders of our technological capacity will keep growing exponentially. And by that logic, at some point in the future we will have found a way to make car engines that use a dl per 100 miles. We'll have cars that can travel in a million kilometres an hour. We will eventually have 2000-core CPUs with two hundred billion gazillion gigahertz on them, and regular household PCs will have 14448gb ram. I can go on. It's a naive and silly way to think of technological advances. Just because we came from one point and advanced to another point, that doesn't mean we can keep advancing infinitely. Everything has its limits, also technology and the universe. Which is why I think this research will hit the point where we have identified the genes that are related to aging, but where all our attempts at controlling them have failed.
If you imagine a skin cell and all the atoms it consists of, and all the quarks that make up the nucleons of said atoms, and consider the fact that nucleons have a charge (or that a nucleon can behave in different ways depending on various factors, rather), then saying that "it's a gene" is a simplification of something that is larger than what we can understand. Considering this, I don't understand how a person can think we will be able to prolong life within X years. What is he basing his estimation on? It came from his ass.
You think it should be illegal? You think trying to improve life and benefit the human race should be illegal? And you mention god too. Why I am not surprised at that
Listen, look at how animals live in slaughterhouses now. That's how we'll live when there's too many people and not enough space/resources. Is that an improvement of life in your opinion? You became a vegetarian because you couldn't take the guilt of allowing it to happen. Lol and you wouldn't extend your own race the same courtesy? Because it's not a guess or an estimation, unless something happens where half the worlds population dies, we will eventually consume all natural resources faster than they can reproduce, and will eventually die out. This research, if successful, would contribute to making that happen a lot faster. So yeah, I'm against the idea that people will suffer in several generations just so I can have a great time right now. I am fine with dying of old age as it is how the universe has always been and I don't think there's a need to change that.
I didn't really mean to discredit it, and it's not that I refuse to move with the time. I just have not seen anything beyond "recent studies" and "think they have isolated the gene which". Never "scientists can now control this gene" or "scientists managed to prolong the life of a human being". Have they even succeeded to substantially prolong the life of any living organism so far? Have they created a mouse that was actually 6 months old but only looked a few weeks? Like, where can I see and touch this new technology? Nowhere, because it's nothing concrete yet. That's what I meant. Every statement is based on observations and guesses of what will happen. No one actually tried to reverse a gene did they ? What happened when they did, if someone has tried it already?
Link me this teleportation device. I'm already assuming that the word "teleportation" is misleading. And I don't think a human can ever survive it.
Well, when you are 80, even though all your skin cells are healthy as they regenerate, something happens to the way they work together or wahtever. There's a reason your skin starts sagging when you get old. This will cease to happen and you will always look young?
That's the point, it ain't. Show me a living creature where the age gene was reversed, where the result was that the creature became unable to die from old age? If not, it's really not happening. It's as much a dream as jetpacks were in the 70s. You just don't see it that way because it's your dream too.
It is actually a misconception that the planet is overpopulated. There are VAST areas in every country that are unpopulated. All it takes is the approval of the landowners to built cities on them, many of whom would do it for a cut.
There are always ways to avoid these problems. If you choose to extend your own life, you could renege on the right to have more than 2 children, for example. It's just a case of finding laws and ways to balance it out.
Bullshit. I explained why above. It would not get to that point amongst the people who would be able to afford the process in the first place.
No, I wouldn't. Because the two situations are not comparable at all and for you to try and appeal to my compassionate side in order to convince me of something that you are wildly uninformed about and speculating on is a pretty weak move.
I think you might want to read up on the progress being made of sustainable resources, in particular the timeframes of how far away we are in being able to survive without consuming natural resources.
Speculative, besides which, the only benefit of YOU increasing YOUR life might be to have a good time, but there are a number of people, who, with the ability to live longer, could provide massive benefits to MILLIONS of people.
Boring backwards conservative attitude. Let me guess, it's OK to believe in the bible because people have done so for a couple thousand years, despite the fact that more have suffered from it than have been helped? It's OK to eat meat because people have always done so, despite the animals being killed?
Because something has always happened one way SHOULD BE a reason to find a new, and better way. Not a lazy excuse to keep doing it the way it's always been done because you can't be bothered to think of the positives, and fear change.
Studies and science like this takes time. Your excuse is like saying they should stop trying to find a cure for cancer because you've never seen enough evidence for them being able to do it. Stop living in your own box, accept the positives and realize that we live in a world of change rather than being reactionary and discrediting something you haven't even heavily looked into just because it interferes with your conservative morals and YOUR perception that things should continue to exist the way that they have. Think outside the box Preachy boy.
I'm not sure how you can say that you don't think a human can survive it when you know nothing about or the method in which is works. Your statement is therefore baseless.
Here's the link:
Scientist Teleport Matter More Than Three Feet - Science News | Science & Technology | Technology News - FOXNews.com
People don't take care of themselves. They eat meat, drink alcohol, are exposed to toxic chemicals on a daily basis, etc. These things are all poisons and that is why skin sags and degenerates. There are some perfectly healthy 80 year olds that look much younger, some could pass for 40 or 50 because of the lifestyle that they lead.
It is happening. The research is progressing. Again, this is like you saying that a cure for cancer is not happening, just because they can't definitively do it yet. Fact is they are working on it, their work is progressing, and it's only a matter of time before scientific breakthroughs happen to cure cancer, to cure AIDS, to reverse the aging process.
You shouldn't be so negative. I don't expect everyone to be an optimist like I am, but damn, why try and find problems with things that are being worked on to increase the quality of human life?
There are always ways to avoid these problems. If you choose to extend your own life, you could renege on the right to have more than 2 children, for example. It's just a case of finding laws and ways to balance it out.
Bullshit. I explained why above. It would not get to that point amongst the people who would be able to afford the process in the first place.
No, I wouldn't. Because the two situations are not comparable at all and for you to try and appeal to my compassionate side in order to convince me of something that you are wildly uninformed about and speculating on is a pretty weak move.
I think you might want to read up on the progress being made of sustainable resources, in particular the timeframes of how far away we are in being able to survive without consuming natural resources.
Speculative, besides which, the only benefit of YOU increasing YOUR life might be to have a good time, but there are a number of people, who, with the ability to live longer, could provide massive benefits to MILLIONS of people.
Boring backwards conservative attitude. Let me guess, it's OK to believe in the bible because people have done so for a couple thousand years, despite the fact that more have suffered from it than have been helped? It's OK to eat meat because people have always done so, despite the animals being killed?
Because something has always happened one way SHOULD BE a reason to find a new, and better way. Not a lazy excuse to keep doing it the way it's always been done because you can't be bothered to think of the positives, and fear change.
Studies and science like this takes time. Your excuse is like saying they should stop trying to find a cure for cancer because you've never seen enough evidence for them being able to do it. Stop living in your own box, accept the positives and realize that we live in a world of change rather than being reactionary and discrediting something you haven't even heavily looked into just because it interferes with your conservative morals and YOUR perception that things should continue to exist the way that they have. Think outside the box Preachy boy.
I'm not sure how you can say that you don't think a human can survive it when you know nothing about or the method in which is works. Your statement is therefore baseless.
Here's the link:
Scientist Teleport Matter More Than Three Feet - Science News | Science & Technology | Technology News - FOXNews.com
People don't take care of themselves. They eat meat, drink alcohol, are exposed to toxic chemicals on a daily basis, etc. These things are all poisons and that is why skin sags and degenerates. There are some perfectly healthy 80 year olds that look much younger, some could pass for 40 or 50 because of the lifestyle that they lead.
It is happening. The research is progressing. Again, this is like you saying that a cure for cancer is not happening, just because they can't definitively do it yet. Fact is they are working on it, their work is progressing, and it's only a matter of time before scientific breakthroughs happen to cure cancer, to cure AIDS, to reverse the aging process.
You shouldn't be so negative. I don't expect everyone to be an optimist like I am, but damn, why try and find problems with things that are being worked on to increase the quality of human life?
Donate
Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.
Members online
No members online now.