Genetic Modification Gone Wild: 10 Signs That Our World May Be Destined To Resemble A Real

[John F Kennedy III]

Genetic Modification Gone Wild: 10 Signs That Our World May Be Destined To Resemble A Really Bad Science Fiction Movie

by The American Dream

http://endoftheamericandream.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Genetic-Modification-Gone-Wild-10-Signs-That-Our-World-May-Be-Destined-To-Resemble-A-Really-Bad-Science-Fiction-Movie-250x165.jpg

Did you know that today scientists are actually producing mice that tweet like birds, cats that glow in the dark, "monster salmon", "spider goats", cow/human hybrids, pig/human hybrids and even mouse/human hybrids? The very definition of life on earth is changing right before our eyes. Many scientists believe that genetic modification holds the key to feeding the entire planet and healing all of our diseases, but others are warning that genetic modification could literally transform our environment into a desolate wasteland and cause our world to resemble a really bad science fiction movie. For decades, scientists around the globe have been fooling around with DNA and have been transplanting genes from one species to another. But now technology has advanced so dramatically that just about the only thing limiting scientists are their imaginations.

The things you are about to read about below are truly bizarre. In recent years, science has really "pushed the envelope" and scientists all over the planet are quite eager to push it even farther.

But is genetic modification really safe? Just because we have discovered that we can do something does that mean that we should rush forward and do it?

Recent films such as "Splice" have highlighted some of the potential dangers of genetic modification, but most scientists don't see any reason to be concerned.

In fact, in most countries scientists seem very eager to push regulators to allow them to go farther and farther. In quite a few countries there are very few boundaries left.

This is a point that I made in an article I authored for another blog called The Future....


At this point there are very few restrictions remaining on fields such as nanotechnology, biotechnology, synthetic biology, cloning and genetic modification. All over the world, scientists are feverishly combining different kinds of animals together, adding plant genes to certain animals, and even putting human DNA into plants and animals. Life as we know it is literally changing, and it is very hard to tell what the future is going to look like if all of this continues.

Sadly, most people have no idea what is going on out there. Most people believe that scientists only have our best interests at heart and that they would never do anything "weird" or "dangerous".

Well, read the following examples of genetic modification below and decide for yourself whether or not things have gotten out of control.

The following are 10 signs that our world may be destined to resemble a really bad science fiction movie....

#1 In China, scientists have inserted human genes into the DNA of dairy cow embryos. At this point, approximately 200 hybrid cows have been successfully produced. These cows can produce milk that is virtually identical to human breast milk. The scientists hope to have huge herds of these cows producing an alternative to human breast milk soon, and they hope to have this "milk" sold in global supermarkets within 3 years.

#2 In Canada, scientists at the University of Guelph in the province of Ontario have produced what they are calling "enviropigs". These "enviropigs" have had genes from mice spliced into them, and according to the scientists they produce less phosphorous in their poop so they are being touted as environmentally friendly. Authorities in both the U.S. and Canada are evaluating whether or not to allow these "enviropigs" into the food supply.

#3 Scientists in Japan have created a genetically modified mouse that tweets like a bird.

#4 One U.S. corporation can now produce a very muscular "monster salmon" which can grow up to three times as fast as normal salmon do.

#5 Science can now produce cats that glow in the dark. A genetically modified cat created by scientists named Mr. Green Genes was the very first fluorescent cat in the United States. But Mr. Green Genes was not the first "glow in the dark cat" in the world. That honor went to a cat created by a team of scientists in South Korea.

#6 In Japan, scientists have discovered that they can grow rat organs inside of mice. The researchers hope to use the same technology to grow human organs inside of pigs.

#7 But Japan is not the only one doing this kind of research. In Missouri, entities that are part pig and part human are being grown with the goal of providing organs for human transplants.

#8 Scientists at Rockefeller University have injected human genes into mice. These "humanized mice" are being used to study the spread of the hepatitis C virus.

#9 U.S. scientists have discovered that they can actually "grow" new human organs from scratch. The following is a quote from a recent Newsweek article....


It might sound like science fiction, but growing new organs from scratch has already become reality. In addition to bladders, scientists have engineered new skin, bone, cartilage, corneas, windpipes, arteries, and urethras.

#10 Believe it or not, a company in Canada known as Nexia has actually taken goats and has genetically modified them to be part spider. The genetic modification process causes these "spider goats" to produce spider silk protein in their milk. This spider silk protein is collected, purified and spun into incredibly strong fibers. These fibers are apparently more durable than Kevlar, more flexible than nylon, and much stronger than steel.

As frightening as all of those examples may sound, the truth is that the genetic modification of plants has gone even farther than the genetic modification of animals has gone.

Today, approximately 93 percent of all soybeans and approximately 80 percent of all corn in the United States have been genetically modified.

Considering the fact that corn is literally in thousands upon thousands of our food products, there is a really good chance that you consumed some genetically modified food today.

Are you certain that it was safe?

Genetically modified crops have been linked to organ disruption in at least 19 different studies.

In addition, there is also an increasing body of evidence that suggests that genetically modified food actually alters our digestive systems.

Do we really know everything that we need to know about genetically modified food?

Perhaps we should have investigated all of this sooner. The truth is that once genetically modified crops get out into the wild it is just about impossible to put the genie back into the bottle.

A while back, a genetically modified strain of maize that was banned in the EU was accidentally sown all across Germany.

Oops.

But once it got out there was no way of totally eliminating it. In fact, in many areas of the world genetically modified crop strains are breeding natural crop strains out of existence.

We are permanently changing the natural order of things.

Is that really a great idea?

Sadly, things are only going to become much more bizarre in future years.

DARPA's current budget actually includes money that is allocated for the development of this kind of technology. Apparently the goal is to someday produce "super soldiers" with "edited DNA" and implantable microchips.

In this article I have only talked about the stuff that we know about and that is admitted in the mainstream media.

So what is going on out there that we don't know about and that the mainstream media is not admitting?

In past decades, genetic engineering was extremely expensive and it was only done by top scientists.

Today, even college students are transplanting genes and creating new lifeforms. There seems to no longer be any taboo on monkeying around with the fabric of life. The field of "synthetic biology" is extremely hot right now and very small companies are "creating" new plants, new animals and even new microorganisms in garages and basements all over the globe.

So what will the future bring?

Will genetic modification enable us to feed the entire world and will it enable us to heal all of the horrible diseases which afflict us?

Or will genetic modification result in a nightmarish world where "man-made life" and twisted human-animal hybrid creatures are free to roam and breed?

Will our bizarre experimentation destroy the environment and turn this planet into a bizarre wasteland?

Only time will tell.


http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/genetic-modification-gone-wild-10-signs-that-our-world-may-be-destined-to-resemble-a-really-bad-science-fiction-movie

[John F Kennedy III]

Part Human/Part Animal Hybrid Monsters Created By Scientists All Over The Planet

The American Dream
July 28, 2011

http://endoftheamericandream.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Part-Human-Part-Animal-Hybrid-Monsters-Are-Being-Created-By-Scientists-All-Over-The-Planet-250x167.jpg

Crazed scientists all over the globe are “playing god” with the very building blocks of life. Today, thanks to extraordinary advances in the field of genetic modification, scientists are now able to do things that were once unthinkable. Part human/part animal hybrid monsters are being created by scientists all over the planet and it is all perfectly legal. Scientists justify mixing the DNA of humans and animals by claiming that it will help them “cure diseases” and “feed the world”, but the reality is that all of this genetic modification is a tremendous threat to the human race. It is only a matter of time before humans start allowing themselves to be genetically-modified in order to “fight illness” or to “enhance” their abilities. The temptation to insert the genes of animals or plants into people in order to create “super soldiers” or a “superior race” will certainly prove to be much too tempting. Unless something is done to hold all of this back, it seems almost certain that genetic hell will be unleashed on the human race. Once genetically-modified humans start breeding with normal humans there will be no putting the genie back into the bottle. Eventually, we could get to the point where there are very few “100% humans” left.

Most Americans have heard about genetic modification, but most of them don’t know a whole lot about it.

Today, the vast majority of the corn and the vast majority of the soy that you eat have been genetically-modified.

In fact, there are thousands upon thousands of food products on store shelves today that contain genetically-modified material.

But modifying plants is one thing. What is even more frightening is when scientists use genetic modification to mix humans with animals.

Recently, a Daily Mail article discussed a new report in the UK that noted that over 150 “human-animal hybrid embryos” have been created in British labs. The following is a brief excerpt from that article….

Scientists have created more than 150 human-animal hybrid embryos in British laboratories.

The hybrids have been produced secretively over the past three years by researchers looking into possible cures for a wide range of diseases.

The revelation comes just a day after a committee of scientists warned of a nightmare ‘Planet of the Apes’ scenario in which work on human-animal creations goes too far.

So who is going to tell scientists when they have gone too far?

Most countries around the globe allow scientists to do pretty much whatever they want when it comes to genetic modification.

The mixing of humans and animals is even going on inside the United States.

The following is from an article posted on MSNBC a few years ago entitled “Scientists Create Animals That Are Part-Human“….

On a farm about six miles outside this gambling town, Jason Chamberlain looks over a flock of about 50 smelly sheep, many of them possessing partially human livers, hearts, brains and other organs.

What do you think most Americans would say if you told them that creatures that are part human/part sheep are being grown inside the United States?

Do you think that they would believe you?

Well, it turns out that our scientists are creating all kinds of monsters that are part human. Just check out what that same MSNBC article said is currently going on….

In the past two years, scientists have created pigs with human blood, fused rabbit eggs with human DNA and injected human stem cells to make paralyzed mice walk.

So shouldn’t we be getting upset about all of this?

Of course we should be.

But the mainstream media barely mentions the bizarre human/animal hybrids that are being created all over the country and so most Americans don’t even realize that it is happening.

There is a lot of other sick stuff going on out there as well.

Did you know that in many areas it is perfectly legal to create human clones for scientific research purposes?

It’s true.

For example, LifeNews.com recently reported that in the state of Minnesota it is now perfectly legal “to use taxpayer dollars to create cloned human embryos“.

Scientists claim that this is perfectly acceptable because they only allow the clones to live for a few days.

Are you disturbed yet?

If not, you should be.

There is some really twisted stuff going on in the scientific community.

Scientists are now coming up with some very “unique” ways to expand the food supply.

In fact, many of us may soon be eating “human gelatin”.

According to an article in Science Daily, scientists are excited about the potential of putting “human-derived gelatin” into marshmallows, candy and other desserts….

Scientists are reporting development of a new approach for producing large quantities of human-derived gelatin that could become a substitute for some of the 300,000 tons of animal-based gelatin produced annually for gelatin-type desserts, marshmallows, candy and innumerable other products.

Doesn’t that just sound so yummy?

So exactly how would this “human gelatin” be made?

The following is how that same Science Daily article describes the process….

To get around these difficulties, the scientists developed and demonstrated a method where human gelatin genes are inserted into a strain of yeast, which can produce gelatin with controllable features.

Yuck.

Pretty soon we all may actually be eating “soylent green“.

Look, if you don’t know much about genetic modification you really need to get educated because it is one of the greatest threats our planet is facing today.

My recent article entitled “Genetic Modification Gone Wild: 10 Signs That Our World May Be Destined To Resemble A Really Bad Science Fiction Movie” is a great place to get started.

The following are a few examples of genetic modification involving human DNA that are noted in that article….

*In China, scientists have inserted human genes into the DNA of dairy cow embryos. At this point, approximately 200 hybrid cows have been successfully produced. These cows can produce milk that is virtually identical to human breast milk. The scientists hope to have huge herds of these cows producing an alternative to human breast milk soon, and they hope to have this “milk” sold in global supermarkets within 3 years.

*Scientists at Rockefeller University have injected human genes into mice. These “humanized mice” are being used to study the spread of the hepatitis C virus.

*In Missouri, entities that are part pig and part human are being grown with the goal of providing organs for human transplants.

Countries all over the world are doing this kind of research.

Unless people start objecting, this “research” is going to keep spreading and it is going to keep becoming even more bizarre.

Science is messing with the very building blocks of life. If we are not very careful, our children and our grandchildren will be living in a world where “man-made life” and “human/animal hybrid monsters” are running around all over the place.

Sometimes it is difficult to convey the true threat posed by genetic modification with only words. Please take a few moments to watch the video posted below. It is put out by Infowars.com and it is entitled “Genetic Armageddon: Humanity’s Greatest Threat“….


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCFP_Unf6zA&feature=player_embedded


http://www.infowars.com/part-humanpart-animal-hybrid-monsters-created-by-scientists-all-over-the-planet/

[Spikender]

Wow... this... this is some scary stuff. I won't lie, I knew only a little about genetic modification before this, but... this is perhaps an equal threat, if not greater, than our government is. Honestly, whatever the government can do can't possibly compete with what these scientists are experimenting with. The government could trample all over our rights, turn us into slaves, and keep growing in power all it wants, but it still couldn't compete with the ability to destroy entire species of plants on a whim, create hybrids of animals that will undoubtedly lead to an unstable hybrid that could cause great havoc or unintended consequences, inject human gelatin into yeast so that we are eating some form of human components, and all other manner of unspeakable horrors. It's as if we have our own miniature army of Doctor Frankensteins all over the world, except they're toying with something a lot more dangerous than lightning and a dead corpse: they're toying with the very fabric of life.

[Nirvikalpa]

This is why I can not, with a good, clean conscience, watch any type of 'genetic modification' movie that comes out in theaters. What people tend to think is some science-fiction funny entertainment... I know it's a lot more real and a lot more sick.


#1 In China, scientists have inserted human genes into the DNA of dairy cow embryos. At this point, approximately 200 hybrid cows have been successfully produced. These cows can produce milk that is virtually identical to human breast milk. The scientists hope to have huge herds of these cows producing an alternative to human breast milk soon, and they hope to have this "milk" sold in global supermarkets within 3 years.

This is incredibly scary. As breastfeeding becomes more and more obsolete... this will be the supposed 'saving grace.' How would this work exactly...?

A mother passes antibodies to the fetus via the umbilicus, and placenta. However, upon birth another major source of antibodies are breastmilk. IgA is a major antibody passed to a newborn, which helps protect the newborn against stomach bacteria. IgA has a protective 'sheath' which prohibits it from being destroyed by the gastric acid of the stomach, and is amazing in the sense it does not cause an inflammatory response once it realizes an antigen - extremely important for a newborn, where in the first few weeks of life the stomach is incredibly sensitive to inflammation, and inflammation can even cause damage to the growing cells there. A mother's body forms antibodies for antigens found in the nearby environment - the same environment and antigens presumably the baby would encounter. So, as the mother's body forms new antibodies, they are passed to the baby through breastfeeding.

I want to know the exact numbers of nutrients, immune cells, vitamins, and antibodies found within this 'human milk.' I highly doubt this 'virtually identical' human milk really has everything true human breast-milk contains - especially weighing in environmental factors.

This aggravates me deeply. I am absolutely convinced this society is slowly separating women completely from the birthing process (C-sections, against midwifery, the allowing of resident doctors within a birth room, the depersonalization of birth, changing the role of a father helping his partner during the birthing process, the increase of formula feeding, Pitocin used in 90% of hospital births to start contractions, instead of nature taking its course...)

[John F Kennedy III]

It's very scary indeed.

[ghengis86]

Thank you Monsanto for the GMO food supply!

[QuickZ06]

WTF!

[John F Kennedy III]

Yep :(

[QueenB4Liberty]

This is why I can not, with a good, clean conscience, watch any type of 'genetic modification' movie that comes out in theaters. What people tend to think is some science-fiction funny entertainment... I know it's a lot more real and a lot more sick.



This is incredibly scary. As breastfeeding becomes more and more obsolete... this will be the supposed 'saving grace.' How would this work exactly...?

A mother passes antibodies to the fetus via the umbilicus, and placenta. However, upon birth another major source of antibodies are breastmilk. IgA is a major antibody passed to a newborn, which helps protect the newborn against stomach bacteria. IgA has a protective 'sheath' which prohibits it from being destroyed by the gastric acid of the stomach, and is amazing in the sense it does not cause an inflammatory response once it realizes an antigen - extremely important for a newborn, where in the first few weeks of life the stomach is incredibly sensitive to inflammation, and inflammation can even cause damage to the growing cells there. A mother's body forms antibodies for antigens found in the nearby environment - the same environment and antigens presumably the baby would encounter. So, as the mother's body forms new antibodies, they are passed to the baby through breastfeeding.

I want to know the exact numbers of nutrients, immune cells, vitamins, and antibodies found within this 'human milk.' I highly doubt this 'virtually identical' human milk really has everything true human breast-milk contains - especially weighing in environmental factors.

This aggravates me deeply. I am absolutely convinced this society is slowly separating women completely from the birthing process (C-sections, against midwifery, the allowing of resident doctors within a birth room, the depersonalization of birth, changing the role of a father helping his partner during the birthing process, the increase of formula feeding, Pitocin used in 90% of hospital births to start contractions, instead of nature taking its course...)

Yeah that makes me sad as well. :(

It is scary. I had no idea all this was already going on.

[Pauls' Revere]

I remember reading The Island of Dr Moreau as a kid and it was scary in that we cant stop our own self destruction kind of way.

http://www.sidereel.com/The_Island_Of_Dr._Moreau

Wow what a visionary H.G. Wells was!

[John F Kennedy III]

I remember reading The Island of Dr Moreau as a kid and it was scary in that we cant stop our own self destruction kind of way.

http://www.sidereel.com/The_Island_Of_Dr._Moreau

Wow what a visionary H.G. Wells was!

I've heard he had Globalist connections, I've yet to research it though.

[Anti Federalist]

"The scoops are on the way!!"

[NewRightLibertarian]

NWO is in full effect, and this is the kind of evil shit they're all about. This mad science needs to be stopped by any means necessary.

[Anti Federalist]

Seriously, this is the greatest environmental threat that humanity now faces.

The consequences of a runaway artificial genetic mutation or an artificially enhanced viral strand, could very easily spell the end of life as we know it.

[Anti Federalist]

This aggravates me deeply. I am absolutely convinced this society is slowly separating women completely from the birthing process (C-sections, against midwifery, the allowing of resident doctors within a birth room, the depersonalization of birth, changing the role of a father helping his partner during the birthing process, the increase of formula feeding, Pitocin used in 90% of hospital births to start contractions, instead of nature taking its course...)

Not to turn this into a "male-female" flame war, but...

Men have been pretty much "separated" from the birth process for decades now, in that science has pretty much rendered us obsolete, if push came down to shove.

It only stands to reason that women would be next.

Until we're all "manufactured".

http://images.wikia.com/matrix/images/b/b7/Free_yourself_from_the_Matrix!.jpg

[BattleFlag1776]

They never should have banned DDT. It opened Pandora's box.

[ryanmkeisling]

This has been going on for much longer than there is evidence for because seed companies have using radioactive cobalt to create tetraploid seeds which is a genetic modification. In fact this is just the next step from using petro chemicals in all aspects of farming.

An italian scientist, Amerigo Mosca, proved that toxic farm chemicals are radio mimetic in that they ape the character of radiation. The damage from nuclear radiation is the same as that from toxic genetic chemicals. And the use of fungicides of organic synthesis (zineb, captan, phaltan, etc.) annually causes the same damage to present and future generations as atomic fallout 14,500 atomic bombs the size of those dropped at Hiroshima. This genetic playground for scientists has been around since the 50's, hence the health care problem, the rise in cancer, diabetes, etc, etc. The same federal organizations we pay taxes to to protect us through regulation have been the ones spearheading this assault on life. Remember that GMO alfalfa is being widely used now and that means that it will be in all the milk and all the products containing milk down the food chain. Buy organic direct from the farm and know their practices, it may save your life. Do not depend on the government to do this for you via regulation, even if it says usda organic on the label, it likely isn't anything more than a reason to charge more.

[Sunstruck-Eden]

While reading the OP, bile crawled up my throat. Seriously. It was a completely subconscious reaction to this vulgarity. Do these scientists have no shame? Do they understand what they are doing is playing with the precious and fragile balance of this world? No wonder this world is going down the drain - we abandoned God and seek to take their place.

[Working Poor]

Dr Frankenstein technology has gone main stream

[LawnWake]

People tend to be scared of stuff they don't understand. To most people, 'spiders are spiders and goats are goat and you DON'T MESS WITH THAT', but really.. if it can somehow improve society, who cares?

Stuff can go wrong, don't get me wrong. But really.. scared of cows growing human organs.. really? Just wait until you're on the bottom of the transplant list, doesn't look that bad now, does it? And spiderwebbing is incredibly strong and flexible, humans can't even come close to copying it. The possibilities with that stuff are endless.

Also, notice how some things are mentioned without any clarification on why they were spliced that way? Kinda like how people criticize Ron Paul for 'wanting to end the department of education' and assume that he's anti-education.

"We are permanently changing the natural order of things."

We did that the moment we set foot on this planet. Hell, nature has been changing since before we were even around. Really, most of the stuff they say merely mentions that things will be 'different'. Well boo-his, times change. Get used to it.

[Tinnuhana]

Ready for Jurassic Park 4?
On this line, you might like to check out the precursor to the JP series: the pilot episode of Jonny Quest from the mid-60s. Crichton must have watched it as a child or something.
Personally, I don't have a problem with growing organs in a non-living substrate. For example, dermis, which is a unversal donor thing like plasma, can be grown in labs and used on burn vicitms. Since it's flexible, people don't need series of painful operations during recovery from burns. This same company working on dermis was working on growing cartilage. They'd take a sample of cartilage form someone needing some (like intervertebral disks) and grow it in a mold to fit perfectly and then replace the bad cartilage with the new. The body won't reject itself, so there would be a high success rate.
I'd draw the line at using animals or animal products (or human, other than traditional like blood transfusioins, where everything is natural and no harm is done to the donor).

[Anti Federalist]

Just because you can, does not mean you should.


People tend to be scared of stuff they don't understand. To most people, 'spiders are spiders and goats are goat and you DON'T MESS WITH THAT', but really.. if it can somehow improve society, who cares?

Stuff can go wrong, don't get me wrong. But really.. scared of cows growing human organs.. really? Just wait until you're on the bottom of the transplant list, doesn't look that bad now, does it? And spiderwebbing is incredibly strong and flexible, humans can't even come close to copying it. The possibilities with that stuff are endless.

Also, notice how some things are mentioned without any clarification on why they were spliced that way? Kinda like how people criticize Ron Paul for 'wanting to end the department of education' and assume that he's anti-education.

"We are permanently changing the natural order of things."

We did that the moment we set foot on this planet. Hell, nature has been changing since before we were even around. Really, most of the stuff they say merely mentions that things will be 'different'. Well boo-his, times change. Get used to it.

[Krugerrand]

Not to turn this into a "male-female" flame war, but...

Men have been pretty much "separated" from the birth process for decades now, in that science has pretty much rendered us obsolete, if push came down to shove.

It only stands to reason that women would be next.

Until we're all "manufactured".

http://images.wikia.com/matrix/images/b/b7/Free_yourself_from_the_Matrix!.jpg

This is one of my main arguments against abortion. As we take parents out of the reproduction process ... who's children are these ... and at point will they be deemed their 'own' self It's only a matter of time before a woman's womb is not necessary to birth a child. Then when is it okay to kill the child? Is a later death okay if its organs and nerves and cells are harvested for somebody on the 'bottom of the transplant list.'

[Anti Federalist]

This is one of my main arguments against abortion. As we take parents out of the reproduction process ... who's children are these ... and at point will they be deemed their 'own' self It's only a matter of time before a woman's womb is not necessary to birth a child. Then when is it okay to kill the child? Is a later death okay if its organs and nerves and cells are harvested for somebody on the 'bottom of the transplant list.'

A valid argument, I think.

And make no mistake, those organs will go to the elite first, before they get to any of us Mundanes.

[LawnWake]

Just because you can, does not mean you should.

And just because you're afraid of it, doesn't mean you shouldn't.


A valid argument, I think.

And make no mistake, those organs will go to the elite first, before they get to any of us Mundanes.

Yeah, that's called capitalism. New products tend to be expensive at first and will drop in price as the production becomes cheaper and more efficient.

[Diurdi]

A valid argument, I think.

And make no mistake, those organs will go to the elite first, before they get to any of us Mundanes. The first computers went to "the elite first" too. If you have money or take a loan, I'm sure you can buy one too.

Doing genetic manipulation with human embryos is a bit scetchy, but doing it with animals is perfectly fine imo.

[John F Kennedy III]

And just because you're afraid of it, doesn't mean you shouldn't.



Yeah, that's called capitalism. New products tend to be expensive at first and will drop in price as the production becomes cheaper and more efficient.

Lol wut?

[SpicyTurkey]

You guys are reading to much into this. I think it's perfectly fine. Who could have imagined the world we will live in 300 years ago, or even 100 years ago?

[TomtheTinker]

I dont even like reading about this stuff..people playing god.

[zade]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIvNopv9Pa8&feature=player_embedded

[zade]

#3 Scientists in Japan have created a genetically modified mouse that tweets like a bird.


dear god no

[Pauls' Revere]

dear god no

Yes.

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2010-12/japanese-mutant-mouse-tweets-bird

listen, turn up the volume.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLu37VvCozw

[Occam's Banana]

Just because you can, does not mean you should.
But it does mean that someone probably will (however unfortunate that may be).

[Anti Federalist]

And just because you're afraid of it, doesn't mean you shouldn't.

Private property rights are the cornerstone of free market economics.

Who do I sue when a viral plague wipes out 99 percent of humanity?

Damn right I'm afraid of that.

[LawnWake]

You guys are reading to much into this. I think it's perfectly fine. Who could have imagined the world we will live in 300 years ago, or even 100 years ago?

Pretty much. We grow up with the notion that the world is 'supposed to be' the way it was when we grew up and with any major change we get "scared". Just the basic fear of what we don't understand, not understanding that there is no way the world is 'supposed' to be like. We're products of our environment. Much like how our children will be products of an environment where goats produce spiderweb proteins. To them it will be normal.


Private property rights are the cornerstone of free market economics.

Who do I sue when a viral plague wipes out 99 percent of humanity?

Damn right I'm afraid of that.

To put things in perspective; humans are scared of scientists creating a disease in a lab that could whipe out millions of people, completely forgetting that non-manmade viruses and bacteria kill thousands yearly as it is (and let's not forget about the plague or the Spanish flew -- which killed millions of people in a single pandemic) and what actually saved us from many things people died from as recently as 100 years ago is scientific progress.

[Ashhhhh]

There is nothing wrong with this. People that oppose slow the progress of mankind

[Krugerrand]

We could be facing a situation where we are altering species faster than evolution can account for the changes. That could be dangerous.

[LawnWake]

We could be facing a situation where we are altering species faster than evolution can account for the changes. That could be dangerous.

We've been doing that for thousands of years already by domesticating animals. Artificial selection is much faster than natural selection.

[Krugerrand]

We've been doing that for thousands of years already by domesticating animals. Artificial selection is much faster than natural selection.

We've been using a much slower process for thousands of years.

[LawnWake]

We've been using a much slower process for thousands of years.

And we can do it much faster now than we did thousand of years ago. Ever seen the modern, huge, supercows? They're insane. We've developed them over decades, maybe less.

It's not the end of the world. If an animal were to get free and breed with related species.. that could be a problem. Or it could fix a problem (nature is unpredictable like that, evolution works a lot like Austrian economics). But you know, you fix this by not letting the animal escape.

Also, we've made a lot of mistakes in the past, like with the killerbees, but people do learn from them.

As I said, the common populace aren't the only ones with common sense, whereas scientists are all balding skinny Germans with a thick accent splicing gorillas with butterflies because they get some sick perverted pleasure out of it. Scientists can only do things there's funding for. Funding is only there if there's a commercial application for it. The market has taken care of this already.

It's kinda weird how people think the market can take care of itself, but don't think those same market dynamics have any influence on science.

[Krugerrand]

And we can do it much faster now than we did thousand of years ago. Ever seen the modern, huge, supercows? They're insane. We've developed them over decades, maybe less.

It's not the end of the world. If an animal were to get free and breed with related species.. that could be a problem. Or it could fix a problem (nature is unpredictable like that, evolution works a lot like Austrian economics). But you know, you fix this by not letting the animal escape.

Also, we've made a lot of mistakes in the past, like with the killerbees, but people do learn from them.

As I said, the common populace aren't the only ones with common sense, whereas scientists are all balding skinny Germans with a thick accent splicing gorillas with butterflies because they get some sick perverted pleasure out of it. Scientists can only do things there's funding for. Funding is only there if there's a commercial application for it. The market has taken care of this already.

It's kinda weird how people think the market can take care of itself, but don't think those same market dynamics have any influence on science.

That is exactly what is happening with genetically modified plants! I'm glad you see it as a potential problem.

There's no free market in this. It's government funded. And, the government blocks property rights owners to sue when their plants get damaged.

[LawnWake]

That is exactly what is happening with genetically modified plants! I'm glad you see it as a potential problem.

There's no free market in this. It's government funded. And, the government blocks property rights owners to sue when their plants get damaged.

I... know it's happening. But I already said that the problems isn't necessarily that bad. There's way more to take consideration before you ring the alarm. All we know is that they're 'genetically modified', but what if that genetic modification has no influence on our consumption of it, or with its selection pressures in the wild?

There's cockroaches in New York.. cockroaches don't belong there, they're a tropical species. How many of you are worrying of these genes unnaturally entering the Northern hemnisphere? Or the genes of seagulls entering garbage heaps far away from sea?

Seriously, chill out. 'Oh noes plants with slightly different genes appear in the wild!' Well, whatever. Natural selection will either select them to go extinct or if they're successful they'll... survive and then what? Just because those genes are in there doesn't mean they have an advantage in that environment BECAUSE of those genes. And we've meddled with nature so often, grabbing our hair and crying our eyeballs out, only to find out that what happened was beneficial in the long run (dumping airplanes and cars into the ocean was frowned upon... until it turned out they created artificial reefs that repopulated large parts of the ocean).

And lastly, you're just plain wrong. Most scienctific innovation comes from the private sector. Period. It's not the evil government conspiring with scientists to destroy the world. It's.. for example... hospitals investing scientific research to help people on transplant lists to get new organs. And it's private companies investing in harvesting spiderwebbing from goatmilk (I already knew of this years ago).

Really, people need to stop being afraid of a world that they're not used to. In the future, we'll live on other planets, create our own animals to consume and genetically modify ourselves to survive.

[Krugerrand]

I... know it's happening. But I already said that the problems isn't necessarily that bad. There's way more to take consideration before you ring the alarm. All we know is that they're 'genetically modified', but what if that genetic modification has no influence on our consumption of it, or with its selection pressures in the wild?

There's cockroaches in New York.. cockroaches don't belong there, they're a tropical species. How many of you are worrying of these genes unnaturally entering the Northern hemnisphere? Or the genes of seagulls entering garbage heaps far away from sea?

Seriously, chill out. 'Oh noes plants with slightly different genes appear in the wild!' Well, whatever. Natural selection will either select them to go extinct or if they're successful they'll... survive and then what? Just because those genes are in there doesn't mean they have an advantage in that environment BECAUSE of those genes. And we've meddled with nature so often, grabbing our hair and crying our eyeballs out, only to find out that what happened was beneficial in the long run (dumping airplanes and cars into the ocean was frowned upon... until it turned out they created artificial reefs that repopulated large parts of the ocean).

And lastly, you're just plain wrong. Most scienctific innovation comes from the private sector. Period. It's not the evil government conspiring with scientists to destroy the world. It's.. for example... hospitals investing scientific research to help people on transplant lists to get new organs. And it's private companies investing in harvesting spiderwebbing from goatmilk (I already knew of this years ago).

Really, people need to stop being afraid of a world that they're not used to. In the future, we'll live on other planets, create our own animals to consume and genetically modify ourselves to survive.

I'm not grabbing hair or crying eyes.

"Private Sector" is very misleading. In my parts, those hospitals that are investing in scientific research are the educational hospitals that are getting huge tax breaks while they actively work to put the for-profit hospitals out of business. They're getting big time tax pay dollars and incentives towards their initiatives.

Mosanto - the leader of genetic modified plants - while 'private sector' is the furthest thing in the world from 'free market.'

Take note, in the post I first replied to you championed the "markets." Then, it got reduced to 'private sector.' Private sector and free market are not equivalent.

[LawnWake]

I'm not grabbing hair or crying eyes.

"Private Sector" is very misleading. In my parts, those hospitals that are investing in scientific research are the educational hospitals that are getting huge tax breaks while they actively work to put the for-profit hospitals out of business. They're getting big time tax pay dollars and incentives towards their initiatives.

Mosanto - the leader of genetic modified plants - while 'private sector' is the furthest thing in the world from 'free market.'

Take note, in the post I first replied to you championed the "markets." Then, it got reduced to 'private sector.' Private sector and free market are not equivalent.

No, but some of the dynamics are still at play and you've evidently missed the point; people aren't doing this for the hell of it. They're doing it because there's a certain demand. There's a demand for organs, if you want it to be or not. This drives people to grow human organs inside of cows.

There was a similar discussion in the thread about the BBC before. Even if it's government commisioned, the competition between private companies is there to earn that money. Regardless of where that money comes from. This drives people to innovate in science. They're not going to do the things they do if there wasn't money for it and they wouldn't be making money off of it if it didn't have a positive use.

[John F Kennedy III]

To put things in perspective; humans are scared of scientists creating a disease in a lab that could whipe out millions of people, completely forgetting that non-manmade viruses and bacteria kill thousands yearly as it is (and let's not forget about the plague or the Spanish flew -- which killed millions of people in a single pandemic) and what actually saved us from many things people died from as recently as 100 years ago is scientific progress.


There is nothing wrong with this. People that oppose slow the progress of mankind


And we can do it much faster now than we did thousand of years ago. Ever seen the modern, huge, supercows? They're insane. We've developed them over decades, maybe less.

It's not the end of the world. If an animal were to get free and breed with related species.. that could be a problem. Or it could fix a problem (nature is unpredictable like that, evolution works a lot like Austrian economics). But you know, you fix this by not letting the animal escape.

Also, we've made a lot of mistakes in the past, like with the killerbees, but people do learn from them.

As I said, the common populace aren't the only ones with common sense, whereas scientists are all balding skinny Germans with a thick accent splicing gorillas with butterflies because they get some sick perverted pleasure out of it. Scientists can only do things there's funding for. Funding is only there if there's a commercial application for it. The market has taken care of this already.

It's kinda weird how people think the market can take care of itself, but don't think those same market dynamics have any influence on science.


I... know it's happening. But I already said that the problems isn't necessarily that bad. There's way more to take consideration before you ring the alarm. All we know is that they're 'genetically modified', but what if that genetic modification has no influence on our consumption of it, or with its selection pressures in the wild?

There's cockroaches in New York.. cockroaches don't belong there, they're a tropical species. How many of you are worrying of these genes unnaturally entering the Northern hemnisphere? Or the genes of seagulls entering garbage heaps far away from sea?

Seriously, chill out. 'Oh noes plants with slightly different genes appear in the wild!' Well, whatever. Natural selection will either select them to go extinct or if they're successful they'll... survive and then what? Just because those genes are in there doesn't mean they have an advantage in that environment BECAUSE of those genes. And we've meddled with nature so often, grabbing our hair and crying our eyeballs out, only to find out that what happened was beneficial in the long run (dumping airplanes and cars into the ocean was frowned upon... until it turned out they created artificial reefs that repopulated large parts of the ocean).

And lastly, you're just plain wrong. Most scienctific innovation comes from the private sector. Period. It's not the evil government conspiring with scientists to destroy the world. It's.. for example... hospitals investing scientific research to help people on transplant lists to get new organs. And it's private companies investing in harvesting spiderwebbing from goatmilk (I already knew of this years ago).

Really, people need to stop being afraid of a world that they're not used to. In the future, we'll live on other planets, create our own animals to consume and genetically modify ourselves to survive.

This must be comedy hour.

[PaulConventionWV]

GE foods are bad and everything, but anyone who buys into this sci-fi BS and thinks the whole world is going to turn into a bunch of animal-animal and animal-human hybrids walking around are just over-hyping this stuff. Some pretty weird things can happen with genetics, but that doesn't mean they can do just anything. There are limits to how far you can stretch any animal's genetic code. The animals that do change in these weird ways have less potential to change in the future. This isn't some evolutionary superlink, either. I can only laugh as people here argue about how scared they are of the GE monsters that will take over the world. This is just the type of thing evolutionists get excited about because they believe it CAN happen or COULD have happened, but none of it is actually scientifically viable.

I'm not going to get into a debate with anyone, just wanted to stop in and let you all know how paranoid and pathetic you are if you think this is the sign of the endtimes or some sci-fi monster world.

[Danke]

#7 But Japan is not the only one doing this kind of research. In Missouri, entities that are part pig and part human are being grown with the goal of providing organs for human transplants.

And those "entities" have been seen shopping at Walmart.

[John F Kennedy III]

GE foods are bad and everything, but anyone who buys into this sci-fi BS and thinks the whole world is going to turn into a bunch of animal-animal and animal-human hybrids walking around are just over-hyping this stuff. Some pretty weird things can happen with genetics, but that doesn't mean they can do just anything. There are limits to how far you can stretch any animal's genetic code. The animals that do change in these weird ways have less potential to change in the future. This isn't some evolutionary superlink, either. I can only laugh as people here argue about how scared they are of the GE monsters that will take over the world. This is just the type of thing evolutionists get excited about because they believe it CAN happen or COULD have happened, but none of it is actually scientifically viable.

I'm not going to get into a debate with anyone, just wanted to stop in and let you all know how paranoid and pathetic you are if you think this is the sign of the endtimes or some sci-fi monster world.

You either have some research to do or you have a mind you need to open up. Your post is incredibly naive.

[John F Kennedy III]

And those "entities" have been seen shopping at Walmart.

And working there.

[PaulConventionWV]

You either have some research to do or you have a mind you need to open up. Your post is incredibly naive.

I take it you believe this is going to be a sci-fi nightmare someday because of all the hype. No matter. I feel perfectly safe not giving a damn because I don't "open my mind" to superstitious nonsense.

[jbuttell]

There is nothing wrong with this. People that oppose slow the progress of mankind

Kind of like those who voiced concern about developing the atomic bomb were just getting in the way of progress?

This reminds me of the media's constant drilling of how good it is for big year-end numbers and growth... how we need to secure energy in foreign countries regardless of the consequences... we must stop at nothing to ensure the candle BURNS twice as bright as the rest!!! Concern ourselves not with burning out, for PROGRESS is at stake!

[John F Kennedy III]

I take it you believe this is going to be a sci-fi nightmare someday because of all the hype. No matter. I feel perfectly safe not giving a damn because I don't "open my mind" to superstitious nonsense.

You have every right to not believe it. But just because you don't believe it doesn't mean it's not true. Nor does it mean it is "superstitious nonsense".

[flightlesskiwi]

Also, we've made a lot of mistakes in the past, like with the killerbees, but people do learn from them.


LOL!!!

[Anti Federalist]

And we can do it much faster now than we did thousand of years ago. Ever seen the modern, huge, supercows? They're insane. We've developed them over decades, maybe less.

Which explains the increase in neurologiocal disorders in children, decreases in men's fertility and girls of 6 and 7 growing breasts.

[John F Kennedy III]

LOL!!!

You can't make this stuff up. Lol.

[flightlesskiwi]

You can't make this stuff up. Lol.

i was just really surprised that statement was seemingly glossed over. RPF members generally aren't to kind when it comes to naivite.

[LawnWake]

Which explains the increase in neurologiocal disorders in children, decreases in men's fertility and girls of 6 and 7 growing breasts.

Yes, there's no other possibility.

[Anti Federalist]

Yes, there's no other possibility.

Quite possible.

And it also possible that the FrankenCows are causing it.

http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/hormones/

[Cutlerzzz]

Private property rights are the cornerstone of free market economics.

Who do I sue when a viral plague wipes out 99 percent of humanity?

Damn right I'm afraid of that.You don't support private property though.

[Anti Federalist]

You don't support private property though.

Because I'm in favor of tariffs?

Or because I believe that you can contractually limit what an employer demands from you when you are not actually working?

[Brown Sapper]

This genetic modifiying is just changing a couple of nucleotides in the host DNA in order to develop specialized proteins . This could really benefit humankind. If you don't like it fine don't support it, but the government has no right to stop it. I thought this place supported free market capitalism.

[LawnWake]

Quite possible.

And it also possible that the FrankenCows are causing it.

http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/hormones/

Sweet, that has nothing to do with genetically engineering animals and plants, but synthesizing and adapting hormones. Related, but different. And there's no conclusive evidence of the harmfulness of growth hormones either.

Also, early onset puberty in girls likely correlates with the amount of fat on their bodies. Enough fat means that their bodies are ready for puberty.

Also, celphone radiation may cause high mortality in sperm in men.

Not conclusive, admittedly, but there's a lot of evidence pointing in that direction as well.

Neurological like what? Please don't say autism. The diagnostic criteria of autism have changed in the last 30 years and the tools have become more precise, hence an increase in diagnoses.

So there's lots of maybes. Meaning that scaremongering people into hating scientists isn't exactly appropriate when you only have limited information to work with.

And by the way, the market is to blame for this. There's a demand for faster growing animals to produce more meat to be sold, people are merely supplying the demand. You can blame the scientists all you want, but why not blame the capitalists who pump their animals full of drugs they don't have any knowledge on? I'm an an-cap, don't get me wrong. I'm as pro-capitalism as they come. But the free market can result in things you or anyone may morally oppose.

[Danke]

This genetic modifiying is just changing a couple of nucleotides in the host DNA in order to develop specialized proteins . This could really benefit humankind. If you don't like it fine don't support it, but the government has no right to stop it. I thought this place supported free market capitalism.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLrTPrp-fW8&feature=player_embedded

[Seraphim]

So long as company A does not claim B while they actually sell C, all is well.

If they claim THIS IS GMO, and you buy it - buyer beware. If they claim it's natural etc and it's GMO, they should have to fight off lawsuits until their eyeballs pop out. I.e..Free market :).


This genetic modifiying is just changing a couple of nucleotides in the host DNA in order to develop specialized proteins . This could really benefit humankind. If you don't like it fine don't support it, but the government has no right to stop it. I thought this place supported free market capitalism.

[donnay]

Let's not forget the Frankenfish! Oh and what the hell is Tilapia? Where is it origins?

http://a.abcnews.com/images/WNT/abc_wn_salmon_100920_wg.jpg

Sources:
http://www.purefood.org/patent/frankenfish031102.cfm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1287084/Scientists-create-GM-Frankenfish-grows-times-fast-normal-salmon.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/WellnessNews/fda-unable-reach-conclusion-genetically-modified-salmon/story?id=11682586#.Tt_WcltNquM
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/237618-US-Genetically-Modified-Salmon-Approval-Pushed-by-USDA-with-Nearly-500-000-Funding
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/sep/12/congress-gm-salmon
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/31/nation/la-na-congress-salmon-20110731

[Nirvikalpa]

This genetic modifiying is just changing a couple of nucleotides in the host DNA in order to develop specialized proteins . This could really benefit humankind. If you don't like it fine don't support it, but the government has no right to stop it. I thought this place supported free market capitalism.

is just changing a couple of nucleotides

is just changing a couple of nucleotides

is just changing a couple of nucleotides

http://i.imgur.com/VBlVm.jpg

[ryanmkeisling]

This genetic modifiying is just changing a couple of nucleotides in the host DNA in order to develop specialized proteins . This could really benefit humankind. If you don't like it fine don't support it, but the government has no right to stop it. I thought this place supported free market capitalism.

The answer would not be for the government to stop it, but for private consumer organizations to inform the public about the dangers of it and for people to stop buying it, therefore the market could take care of it. The problem is 90% of what is in grocery stores contains GMO products and even fresh vegetables that are not grown according to organic standards are full of radio mimetic fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides that have been directly linked to a wide range of diseases and disorders. These are not responsible companies and scientists doing this stuff and the government helps them to do it and encourages it through massive mono-crop subsides of your tax payer dollars. It is profit driven, not for the benefit of humankind, as the tax payer is literally paying them to make them sick so the pharmaceutical complex can also profit from them.

Its one big circle, the same companies that produce the antibiotics you are forced to buy and use due to sickness are the same ones that are 70% of the feed of the same animals you buy in the form of meat to keep you alive, that have been raised in unsanitary, and abusive conditions.

Admittedly some of this stuff could be used for good but there is plenty of evidence that its use in agriculture and the food system is very dangerous. At the very least there should be labeling mandates for the companies that sell this stuff so that consumers can make informed decisions. Do some reading on the effects of horizontal gene transfer, there is a great book by a world renown genetic scientist, Mae-Wan Ho, Genetic Engineering: Dream or Nightmare? I can quote from it if you'd like? It is not widely available here in the US, due to the academic and governmental protections these companies receive. Here is a direct quote:


"A scientist from the Center for Complex Infectious Diseases in Rosemead, Ca, isolated an unusual virus from patients with various chronic fatigue syndrome that has more than fifty bacterial genes. He regards the hybrid virus-bacterium as a new organism and has coined the name 'viteria' for it. Viteria most closely resemble a cytomegalovirus, one of the first viruses to be exploited as a vector for the genetic manipulation of animals. And top of the list of bacteria from which it has captured genes Escherichia coli and Bacillus subtilis, the two most commonly used bacteria in genetic engineering. Could viteria be a pathogenicity island in viral clothing?

As the many virulence genes required for causing disease are all clustered together on mobile, infectious units, non-pathogens could be converted into pathogens in a single horizontal gene transfer event. This emphasizes the dander of releasing transgenic micro-organisms into the environment, even those that are not known to be pathogenic. This has been routinely done since genetic engineering began.

The evidence is now overwhelming that horizontal gene transfer has been responsible for both the rapid spread of antibiotic resistance and the emergence of virulent strains of pathogens...."

I could go on? The problem is not necessarily that they are doing this stuff it is that they are not being responsible about it because it is largely profit driven and this is an area where the ideas of free market capitalism has no experience because it is so intertwined with our own cellular biology and that of the nature we live within. The ideas of freedom are changing in this context. Why do you think there is such an increase in diseases such as diabetes, cancer, super viruses, etc. in the past 50 years? Explain that?

Irresponsible science is surly at the helm, it would be better to be fully informed than advocating this stuff. If you were the grocery store would be a scary place. I raely go in one anymore and when I do I am very selective about what I buy.

[Brown Sapper]

There is always risk when creating something new like this, but to shy away from it will keep us from progressing. These GMF are constantly being tested and most of the proteins that are found in most GMF are found in other forms of food that you would otherwise eat. Granted there are some GMFs that have been found to be unhealthy and we should reform them through free-market solutions, but don't punish the good ones out there. The article that you have quoted show only proof of the adaptation of viruses. Basically it saying that a virus exchanged some nucleotides from a bacteria and now there is some kind of psuedo-super bacteria that happened to be from a common strain used in typical experiments. Do you even know what they mean by "horizontal gene transfer"? If you did then you would know that this piece is sensationalism.

[Brown Sapper]

Is there anything wrong with this?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070430224426.htm

[Krugerrand]

There is always risk when creating something new like this, but to shy away from it will keep us from progressing. These GMF are constantly being tested and most of the proteins that are found in most GMF are found in other forms of food that you would otherwise eat. Granted there are some GMFs that have been found to be unhealthy and we should reform them through free-market solutions, but don't punish the good ones out there. The article that you have quoted show only proof of the adaptation of viruses. Basically it saying that a virus exchanged some nucleotides from a bacteria and now there is some kind of psuedo-super bacteria that happened to be from a common strain used in typical experiments. Do you even know what they mean by "horizontal gene transfer"? If you did then you would know that this piece is sensationalism.

I think of "progress" as moving towards a goal - otherwise, how can one tell progress from regress? So, this progress you're talking about ... what is the goal?

[donnay]

There is always risk when creating something new like this, but to shy away from it will keep us from progressing. These GMF are constantly being tested and most of the proteins that are found in most GMF are found in other forms of food that you would otherwise eat. Granted there are some GMFs that have been found to be unhealthy and we should reform them through free-market solutions, but don't punish the good ones out there. The article that you have quoted show only proof of the adaptation of viruses. Basically it saying that a virus exchanged some nucleotides from a bacteria and now there is some kind of psuedo-super bacteria that happened to be from a common strain used in typical experiments. Do you even know what they mean by "horizontal gene transfer"? If you did then you would know that this piece is sensationalism.

I have a REAL problem with people who have God complexes. Men/women in white coats in labs splicing human genomes into rice, is nothing good, I can assure you.

Sources:
http://www.irec.org.au/farmer_f/pdf_177/The%20human%20genome%20shapes%20rice%20breeding.pd f
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/006/Y4751E/y4751e0c.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-440302/The-rice-human-genes.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/021683.html
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/221993-The-Rice-With-Human-Genes

[donnay]

Is there anything wrong with this?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070430224426.htm

So you think genetically modifying food with synthetic medication is okay? Should we all be forced to take vaccines, because government says it is good for us?

Wasn't it government who approved; Vioxx, Advandia, Baycal, Phen-Phen and other medications that maim or killed people? Isn't it government who told everyone sodium fluoride is okay to put in drinking water? How can people use discernment when government gives their seal of approval under the auspices protecting you?

[Brown Sapper]

"The goal" is to solve world problems through genetic engineering check out the link on the Hep B bananas. What about crops that are resistant to disease and drought.

How do you figure that scientists have a god complex. Scientists are just people in pursuit of knowledge. The engineers are the ones that implement it into society. If you have a problem with GMO or GMF then don't buy. Pay the premium for "100% organic" food. I do admit the the genetic pollution (strains of GMF contaminating wild type or other crops) is a problem, but you can hold the farmers of those crops responsible for it.

[donnay]

"The goal" is to solve world problems through genetic engineering check out the link on the Hep B bananas. What about crops that are resistant to disease and drought.

How do you figure that scientists have a god complex. Scientists are just people in pursuit of knowledge. The engineers are the ones that implement it into society. If you have a problem with GMO or GMF then don't buy. Pay the premium for "100% organic" food. I do admit the the genetic pollution (strains of GMF contaminating wild type or other crops) is a problem, but you can hold the farmers of those crops responsible for it.

For the greater good...boy oh boy where have I heard that before? :rolleyes: You endorse Pharma-Crops, then. People are going to be force to be medicated--and you see nothing wrong with this, or a possibility for abuse? Do you realize when farmers buy GMO seeds, they are then beholden to the company for next years crop? The GMO crops will not reproduce seeds to save for the next years crop. A farmer who is growing GMO Corn will contaminate the other farmers in the area.

[Brown Sapper]

Noone is forcing the GMFs down anyones throat. The farmers can get seeds from someone else and the other farmers should be able to sue for damages to their crop. Your the one using the state to ban GMF. They are providing alternatives.

[donnay]

Noone is forcing the GMFs down anyones throat. The farmers can get seeds from someone else and the other farmers should be able to sue for damages to their crop. Your the one using the state to ban GMF. They are providing alternatives.

If GMO crops destroys other farmers crops then who's rights are being infringed? Do you realize the health risks of consuming GMF's?


Shocking Fact About Genetically Modified Foods

The FDA suppressed a report that described lesions being created in the stomachs of mice that had eaten the Flavr Savr®. As a matter of fact, "Seven out of forty rats tested died within two weeks for unstated reasons."

Do you use Crisco Vegetable oil? Because if you do, it is mostly GMO-soybean oil. 95% of soy grown in the USA is genetically modified.

Sources:
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/HealthRisksBrochure/index.cfm
http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/do-gm-crops-increase-yield.aspx
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/index.cfm
http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/nutrition/genetically-modified-foods

[John F Kennedy III]

"The goal" is to solve world problems through genetic engineering check out the link on the Hep B bananas. What about crops that are resistant to disease and drought.

How do you figure that scientists have a god complex. Scientists are just people in pursuit of knowledge. The engineers are the ones that implement it into society. If you have a problem with GMO or GMF then don't buy. Pay the premium for "100% organic" food. I do admit the the genetic pollution (strains of GMF contaminating wild type or other crops) is a problem, but you can hold the farmers of those crops responsible for it.

Most of them aren't even labeled.

[John F Kennedy III]

Noone is forcing the GMFs down anyones throat. The farmers can get seeds from someone else and the other farmers should be able to sue for damages to their crop. Your the one using the state to ban GMF. They are providing alternatives.

Do some research. Or pay attention to what others are posting on this thread instead of ignoring them so that you can keep saying your crap.

[Krugerrand]

"The goal" is to solve world problems through genetic engineering check out the link on the Hep B bananas. What about crops that are resistant to disease and drought.

How do you figure that scientists have a god complex. Scientists are just people in pursuit of knowledge. The engineers are the ones that implement it into society. If you have a problem with GMO or GMF then don't buy. Pay the premium for "100% organic" food. I do admit the the genetic pollution (strains of GMF contaminating wild type or other crops) is a problem, but you can hold the farmers of those crops responsible for it.

how very specific ... well, perhaps I don't want your solution to my problems.

[BattleFlag1776]

Let's not forget the Frankenfish! Oh and what the hell is Tilapia? Where is it origins?

Talapia:
http://www.thejump.net/id/more-fish/nile-tilapia.jpg
From the Nile River, Egypt in particular.

[BattleFlag1776]

"The goal" is to solve world problems through genetic engineering check out the link on the Hep B bananas. What about crops that are resistant to disease and drought.

How do you figure that scientists have a god complex. Scientists are just people in pursuit of knowledge. The engineers are the ones that implement it into society. If you have a problem with GMO or GMF then don't buy. Pay the premium for "100% organic" food. I do admit the the genetic pollution (strains of GMF contaminating wild type or other crops) is a problem, but you can hold the farmers of those crops responsible for it.

The "goal" is to corner the market via patents. Saving the world has nothing to do with it.

[Brown Sapper]

how very specific ... well, perhaps I don't want your solution to my problems.

Then don't eat the bananas.

[heavenlyboy34]

crazy shit, right there. :eek: However, I don't eat corn or soy (humans weren't made for it), so it's not that big a deal for me as long as livestock raised for food is grass-fed. The bigger problem with these crazy GMO plants is cross-contamination with organics plants (a violation of the NAP and aggression against others' property). If the GMOs are raised in greenhouses, it's not such a problem.

[Brown Sapper]

So you think genetically modifying food with synthetic medication is okay? Should we all be forced to take vaccines, because government says it is good for us?

Wasn't it government who approved; Vioxx, Advandia, Baycal, Phen-Phen and other medications that maim or killed people? Isn't it government who told everyone sodium fluoride is okay to put in drinking water? How can people use discernment when government gives their seal of approval under the auspices protecting you?

I don't mind just like the rice they used a gene sequence to have rice produce a protein the helps diaherra you guys posted. Like I say if you don't like it don't eat it.

[heavenlyboy34]

Quite possible.

And it also possible that the FrankenCows are causing it.

http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/hormones/
Estrogens in plastic containers have also been implicated in this. (didn't read the whole thread-sorry if that's been mentioned.)

[heavenlyboy34]

Private property rights are the cornerstone of free market economics.

Who do I sue when a viral plague wipes out 99 percent of humanity?

Damn right I'm afraid of that.
Not according to Roy L. ;)

[Brown Sapper]

http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Publ...hure/index.cfm-yes cause this is a valid scientific site and the information here should be trusted because they have no agenda.

http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pa...ase-yield.aspx-Monsanto is a terrible corporation that use genetic engineering not for the good humanity but will destroy this earth for profit. I agree with you there but there is nothing in this link to relate GM product to any hazardous conditions in fact it relates genetic engineering to that of old school crossbreeding for specific traits.
Most genetic engineering just supress and promote natural genes in the host's DNA such as resistance to disease and others
http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/n...modified-foods-the best they could do is come up with some people getting sick over nut allergies. The other one with tryptophan was taken to court and the people were awarded 2 billion dollars.

Can anyone provide scientific evidence of GMF harming people and if so was anyone punished

[Brown Sapper]

http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/hormones/ These were hormones injected into cow's, along the same lines of steriods, the manufacturer of the hormone is monsanto and nothing good comes from them. I'm talking about genetic engineering in which the host DNA is changed.

[Brown Sapper]

So you think genetically modifying food with synthetic medication is okay? Should we all be forced to take vaccines, because government says it is good for us?

Wasn't it government who approved; Vioxx, Advandia, Baycal, Phen-Phen and other medications that maim or killed people? Isn't it government who told everyone sodium fluoride is okay to put in drinking water? How can people use discernment when government gives their seal of approval under the auspices protecting you?

Man noone is saying the government should force you to eat anything. You are trying to ban genetic engineering out of fear of the products. Do you not believe if these products are bad for you that you can sue the shit out of them? Don't you think it is in the best interest of companies making this food to make a safe product from fear of being sued?

[John F Kennedy III]

The "goal" is to corner the market via patents. Saving the world has nothing to do with it.

+ rep

[John F Kennedy III]

I don't mind just like the rice they used a gene sequence to have rice produce a protein the helps diaherra you guys posted. Like I say if you don't like it don't eat it.

Apparently you like to ignore posts.

[LawnWake]

This fear of science is hilarious, seriously. People don't know what scientists do, stuff can go wrong, they don't understand how scientists do it, they don't understand how/why it can go wrong and they don't know what to do about WHEN something goes wrong and they get nervous when they realize they have no control over it. This is basic fear of the unknown. Kids afraid of the dark.

Seriously, if you're afraid that cameras will steal your soul, don't let people take pictures of you. If you don't morally support genetically engineered food, don't pay for it.

[Brown Sapper]

Apparently you like to ignore posts. Now your the consumer and you should know what you put into your body and if you don't want any GMO then you should take the time and research which does or doesn't. In one breadth you advocate the ineffectiveness of the FDA and then blame them for keeping you safe from GMOs. You can't have it both ways.

[Brown Sapper]

I'd be amazed if any of these guys could explain how DNA is linked to proteins. If they did we wouldn't be having this argument.

[John F Kennedy III]

Now your the consumer and you should know what you put into your body and if you don't want any GMO then you should take the time and research which does or doesn't. In one breadth you advocate the ineffectiveness of the FDA and then blame them for keeping you safe from GMOs. You can't have it both ways.

They can put whatever they want in our food without labeling it and it is our fault for not knowing it is in there?

[Brown Sapper]

They can put whatever they want in our food without labeling it and it is our fault for not knowing it is in there? You do know that the only reason why food nutrition facts on their products is because the FDA right. Do a little research yourself and stop leaving the government to do your legwork, unless your into that whole big government thing. That's cool too.

[John F Kennedy III]

You do know that the only reason why food nutrition facts on their products is because the FDA right. Do a little research yourself and stop leaving the government to do your legwork, unless your into that whole big government thing. That's cool too.

You seem to think that they will post what is in there somewhere for us to find. Very naive.

And you seem to think we are lazy because they secretly put things in our food.

[Anti Federalist]

There is a long history of the negative unintended consequences of technological "advances".

Your post is a condescending mess, not worthy of more of a response than that.


This fear of science is hilarious, seriously. People don't know what scientists do, stuff can go wrong, they don't understand how scientists do it, they don't understand how/why it can go wrong and they don't know what to do about WHEN something goes wrong and they get nervous when they realize they have no control over it. This is basic fear of the unknown. Kids afraid of the dark.

Seriously, if you're afraid that cameras will steal your soul, don't let people take pictures of you. If you don't morally support genetically engineered food, don't pay for it.

[Brown Sapper]

You seem to think that they will post what is in there somewhere for us to find. Very naive.

And you seem to think we are lazy because they secretly put things in our food. If you ask and they don't provide then you have the option of not using that product. If you use it and it harms you than you have the right to sue. Stop playing the victim.

[Brown Sapper]

There is a long history of the negative unintended consequences of technological "advances".

Your post is a condescending mess, not worthy of more of a response than that.

So should we just stop research because of "unintended consequences". Fuck that guy who invented fire see all the shit he started.

[Brown Sapper]

Here you go JFK III: http://www.organicitsworthit.org/quick/gmos-101
How can you avoid GMOs?
The best way to avoid GMOs is to choose organic. By law, organic products must be made and produced without the use of genetic engineering. That is why at every phase in the production process, organic processors and producers are required to take steps to make sure that you and your family are getting all the benefits you need and want and none of the things you don’t—including GMOs. That means not planting or treating land on which organic food and fiber is grown with prohibited substances (including GMOs); creating buffer zones to prevent contact between organic and non-organic crops; cleaning machinery to prevent contact between organic and non-organic items and minimize the risk of contamination; and storing organic and non-organic ingredients separately to ensure that the organic products have as little risk as possible of containing GMOs.

This should help you on your quest to be GMO free.

[LawnWake]

There is a long history of the negative unintended consequences of technological "advances".

There's a long history of negative unintended consequences in anything. By your logic we should pretty much stop exisiting because existence can result into a catastrophe. Or that we shouldn't have invented the wheel because it eventually lead to car accidents.

[Brown Sapper]

http://www.organicitsworthit.org/learn/lesson-gmo-labels

Many of us are concerned about the effects genetically modified foods have on our health. And for good reason: we also do not have information conclusively proving that GMOs are safe.

The challenge is figuring out how to avoid GMOs, since they are not required by law to be labeled.

Here are some helpful hints to keep in mind as you scan store shelves for products made without the use of GMOs.

Look for the USDA organic label.
By law, organic products must be made without the use of GMOs.

Look at PLU (price look-up) codes on produce items.
Five-digit PLU codes beginning with “8” indicate that produce is genetically modified. Be aware, though, that many genetically modified produce items are not labeled.

Five-digit PLU codes beginning with “9” indicate that produce is organic and not genetically modified.

Be aware of crops that are often genetically modified in the U.S. – as well as the ingredients made from them.
• Corn
• Soy
• Canola
• Sugar beets
• Cotton

Remember: just because you don’t consume these crops by themselves doesn’t mean you’re avoiding GMOs. If you see any of the following ingredients on the labels of products you consume, and the ingredient is not labeled as non-GMO or organic, it is likely genetically modified.

• Corn syrup, starch, oil, meal, gluten
• Soy lecithin, protein, flour, isolate and isoflavone
• Sugar (unless it is made from cane)
• Vegetable oil
• Cottonseed oil

[PaulConventionWV]

If GMO crops destroys other farmers crops then who's rights are being infringed? Do you realize the health risks of consuming GMF's?



Do you use Crisco Vegetable oil? Because if you do, it is mostly GMO-soybean oil. 95% of soy grown in the USA is genetically modified.

Sources:
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/HealthRisksBrochure/index.cfm
http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/do-gm-crops-increase-yield.aspx
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/index.cfm
http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/nutrition/genetically-modified-foods

All of this stuff is government authorized and government funded. Monsanto and all the other big corporations who use this stuff get special privileges. If the wind blows some GMO seeds onto another farmer's farm, who gets sued? If you guessed the corporation, then you are absolutely 100% wrong. The farmer gets sued for patent infringement, when chances are, the farmer didn't want the GMO product. Everyone bow down to Monsanto et al. They buy out food production worldwide so they can make the world die a little more while they get filthy stinking rich.

[PaulConventionWV]

Man noone is saying the government should force you to eat anything. You are trying to ban genetic engineering out of fear of the products. Do you not believe if these products are bad for you that you can sue the shit out of them? Don't you think it is in the best interest of companies making this food to make a safe product from fear of being sued?

They won't be sued because it's not a free market we're talking about. Propaganda and deception is used, and the playing field is tilted in their favor. If anyone gets sued, it's the little farmers who try to fight the government and the victims of Monsanto, not Monsanto itself.

[PaulConventionWV]

This fear of science is hilarious, seriously. People don't know what scientists do, stuff can go wrong, they don't understand how scientists do it, they don't understand how/why it can go wrong and they don't know what to do about WHEN something goes wrong and they get nervous when they realize they have no control over it. This is basic fear of the unknown. Kids afraid of the dark.

Seriously, if you're afraid that cameras will steal your soul, don't let people take pictures of you. If you don't morally support genetically engineered food, don't pay for it.

How are we supposed to not pay for something when it's everywhere and is cheaper than the other products, not to mention that it's not even labeled.

[PaulConventionWV]

I'd be amazed if any of these guys could explain how DNA is linked to proteins. If they did we wouldn't be having this argument.

Translation. You're welcome.

[Anti Federalist]

There's a long history of negative unintended consequences in anything. By your logic we should pretty much stop exisiting because existence can result into a catastrophe. Or that we shouldn't have invented the wheel because it eventually lead to car accidents.

Don't be stupid.

You equated those who have legitimate concerns about GMO technology with dismal savages living in the dirt.

To honestly assess the bottom line of technology and assess its risk/benefit is not Luddism.

This is just another one of those infuriating double standards of modern society.

People will get the vapors and faints over (the horror) a smoldering shred of plant matter or getting into a car without seat belts, roll cages, HANS devices, twenty self inflating blimps and god knows what else, but blindly trusts the government/medical/science complex, that kills hundreds of thousands of people every year.

[PaulConventionWV]

If you ask and they don't provide then you have the option of not using that product. If you use it and it harms you than you have the right to sue. Stop playing the victim.

Do you agree that they should at least label their products?

[heavenlyboy34]

There's a long history of negative unintended consequences in anything. By your logic we should pretty much stop exisiting because existence can result into a catastrophe. Or that we shouldn't have invented the wheel because it eventually lead to car accidents.
Except walking and creating the wheel don't alter/mutate anyone's DNA. GMO foods do alter DNA. That's why when organic crops are cross-pollinated by GMO seeds blown in from a nearby field, the farmer loses his organic certification.

[PierzStyx]

Just another step towards a Brave New World. Next thing you know we'll just go down to our local cloning center for children.

[donnay]

All of this stuff is government authorized and government funded. Monsanto and all the other big corporations who use this stuff get special privileges. If the wind blows some GMO seeds onto another farmer's farm, who gets sued? If you guessed the corporation, then you are absolutely 100% wrong. The farmer gets sued for patent infringement, when chances are, the farmer didn't want the GMO product. Everyone bow down to Monsanto et al. They buy out food production worldwide so they can make the world die a little more while they get filthy stinking rich.

We are in agreement. Monsanto's advancement are not for optimum health--it's a slow kill. They should be brought up on charges of genocide.

[LawnWake]

Don't be stupid.

You equated those who have legitimate concerns about GMO technology with dismal savages living in the dirt.

To honestly assess the bottom line of technology and assess its risk/benefit is not Luddism.

This is just another one of those infuriating double standards of modern society.

People will get the vapors and faints over (the horror) a smoldering shred of plant matter or getting into a car without seat belts, roll cages, HANS devices, twenty self inflating blimps and god knows what else, but blindly trusts the government/medical/science complex, that kills hundreds of thousands of people every year.

I'm actually just saying that if you don't agree with it, don't financially endorse it and that the assumption that scientists aren't regular people with as much common sense as anybody else and are out to destroy the world reeks of fear of the unknown. I've said myself that there are some legitemate concerns before, but people blow it out of proportions and start fear mongering as if it's the end of the world. 'Unforeseeable consequences' are just that, you can't foresee them and existence itself is full of them, so why single out genetic modifcation?

First society scares us with global cooling, then global warming and pig flu and who knows what else and now it's genetically modified food.

The scientists are supplying a demand and they're only responsible for their products. It's farmers who are responsible for their crops and consumers who are responsible for their groceries. It's funny how no one seems to blame any farmer for using it and hell, PaulConvention doesn't even blame himself (the consumer) for buying it (because it's cheaper and he believes that the government should make his prefered product cheaper) and everyone's raging on those scientists who play God. Share a little responsibility here.


Except walking and creating the wheel don't alter/mutate anyone's DNA. GMO foods do alter DNA.

Uh yeah, that wasn't the argument. He was saying that genetic modification can have bad unforeseen consequences; everything can. Period. So why suddenly draw a magic line because 'they can alter our DNA'? You know that sunlight can alter your DNA as well, right? In your lifetime?


That's why when organic crops are cross-pollinated by GMO seeds blown in from a nearby field, the farmer loses his organic certification.

Property rights are the problem here, or a lack thereof. Not genetically modified food.


How are we supposed to not pay for something when it's everywhere and is cheaper than the other products, not to mention that it's not even labeled.

Do your research? If it's so important to you, you would spend the extra few bucks on it. There's a reason it's more expensive and it's up to you, the consumer, to ultimately decide what the product's worth and if you want to comply with the price. If you want the government to control the market because you don't want to spend more money on certain products or do your own research, that's fine. I don't want that.

[donnay]

I'm actually just saying that if you don't agree with it, don't financially endorse it and that the assumption that scientists aren't regular people with as much common sense as anybody else and are out to destroy the world reeks of fear of the unknown. I've said myself that there are some legitemate concerns before, but people blow it out of proportions and start fear mongering as if it's the end of the world. 'Unforeseeable consequences' are just that, you can't foresee them and existence itself is full of them, so why single out genetic modifcation?

Really? Is that all we have to do? Kind of like the government resurrecting and generically engineering the 1918 Spanish Flu (which had be eradicated), from a body of a frozen corpse who died of it.


Disease by Design: 1918 "Spanish" Flu Resurrection Creates Major Safety and Security Risks

The resurrection of 1918 influenza has plunged the world closer to a flu pandemic and to a biodefense race scarcely separable from an offensive one, according to the Sunshine Project, a biological weapons watchdog.

"There was no compelling reason to recreate 1918 flu and plenty of good reasons not to. Instead of a dead bug, now there are live 1918 flu types in several places, with more such strains sure to come in more places," says Sunshine Project Director Edward Hammond, "The US government has done a great misdeed by endorsing and encouraging the deliberate creation of extremely dangerous new viruses. The 1918 experiments will be replicated and adapted, and the ability to perform them will proliferate, meaning that the possibility of man-made disaster, either accidental or deliberate, has risen for the entire world."

The 1918 experiments are part of the US biodefense program and are of no practical value in responding to outbreaks of "bird flu" (H5N1). The 1918 virus is a different type (H1N1) of influenza than "bird flu". 1918 flu is more than eighty five years old and no longer exists in nature, posing no natural threat. While it is reasonable to determine the genetic sequence of 1918 and other extinct influenza strains, there is no valid reason to recreate the virulent virus, as the risks far outweigh the benefits.

But the most significant story isn't Tumpey, Taubenberger, and colleagues. It is the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) attitude about the experiments and its implications. "The biggest news about resurrecting 1918 flu is the US government's enthusiastic embrace of designer disease and the impact that it will have on our future." says Hammond, "By encouraging genetic riffs on influenza and other viruses with the explicit intent of building more dangerous pathogens, CDC is fueling the gathering dangers of competition to discover the worst possibilities of biotechnology applied to bioweapons agents. Some might do it just to keep up with the Americans, resulting in a further blurring of defense and offense and heightening the biological mistrust evident in US foreign policy."

In addition to the potentially broad damage to international security and cooperation in the biological sciences if novel diseases continue to be created, the 1918 experiments heighten the chance that a flu lab will be the source of the next pandemic.

CDC says that it plans to keep its vials of 1918 flu under close guard in one place. But that's a red herring according to the Sunshine Project. Influenza with as many as five 1918 flu genes, and which are potentially pandemic, have already been handled at labs in at least four places other than CDC, including labs in Athens, GA, Winnipeg, MB (Canada), Seattle, WA, and Madison, WI. With the exception of the Canadian lab, none of these facilities has maximum (BSL-4) biological containment, and it is a virtual certainty that more labs will begin 1918 flu work now.

In fact, the only possible source of a new 1918 influenza outbreak is a laboratory. The situation of the 1918 flu is not dissimilar to SARS, whose natural transmission is believed to have been halted. The experience with SARS accidents is chilling: It has escaped three different labs to date. A 1918 influenza escape would be very likely to take a higher human toll. The US biodefense program has also had a number of lab accidents since 2002, including mishandling of anthrax and plague and laboratory-acquired infections of tularemia. In Russia, a researcher contracted ebola and died last year.

Importantly, human error and equipment failures aren't the only ways for a disease agent to escape a lab - something vividly illustrated by the anthrax letters in the US four years ago. Unlike anthrax, however, 1918 influenza would transmit from human to human.

"We are no safer from a pandemic today than yesterday. In fact, we're in greater danger, not only from influenza; but from the failure of the US to come to grips with and address the threats posed by the research it sponsors, in terms of legislation, ethics, and self-restraint." concludes Hammond.

-end-
http://www.sunshine-project.org/publications/pr/pr051005.html




I guess it is only microbiologist that need to worry about sudden death syndrome eh? 19 mysterious deaths of microbiologist. Here is a list of the dead microbiologist: http://www.rense.com/general62/list.htm

I am sure that is just a coincidence. The government would NEVER harm it's citizens--Oh nooooooo. Hegelian Dialectic--Problem, reaction, solution! Problem: resurrect the 1918 Pandemic. Reaction: Some people die of mysterious disease that resembles that of the 1918 Spanish Influenza. Solution: Government will have antidote.

Sources:
http://history1900s.about.com/od/1910s/p/spanishflu.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/ops/hsc-scen-3_pandemic-1918.htm
http://www.ninthday.com/tauben.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080817223642.htm
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6502-virulent-1918-flu-genes-resurrected.html
http://www.legitgov.org/flu_oddities_shortnews.html

[ryanmkeisling]

This ^^^ + rep. Some of us are having a DNA activation others will perish in the coming years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=k1hmoo3lnTo

Lawnwake and brown sapper: I never implied this stuff would end the world but it really will fuck it up and make life harder as it has been getting so. That is why we are all here, freedom is much more than politics. Responsibility is what its about.

Nature is sentient. The more we screw with it, the more it will screw with us.

Evolution is not only about advancing science at any cost. Responsibility.

[ryanmkeisling]

Do you agree that they should at least label their products?

This^^^ + rep. Labeling mandates are actually something the government should be responsible for enforcing.

[KingRobbStark]

Its funny how most of the people here are trying to enforce their brand of morality on the rest.

[John F Kennedy III]

This ^^^ + rep. Some of us are having a DNA activation others will perish in the coming years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=k1hmoo3lnTo

Lawnwake and brown sapper: I never implied this stuff would end the world but it really will fuck it up and make life harder as it has been getting so. That is why we are all here, freedom is much more than politics. Responsibility is what its about.

Nature is sentient. The more we screw with it, the more it will screw with us.

Evolution is not only about advancing science at any cost. Responsibility.

Big +rep

[KingRobbStark]

This ^^^ + rep. Some of us are having a DNA activation others will perish in the coming years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=k1hmoo3lnTo

Lawnwake and brown sapper: I never implied this stuff would end the world but it really will fuck it up and make life harder as it has been getting so. That is why we are all here, freedom is much more than politics. Responsibility is what its about.

Nature is sentient. The more we screw with it, the more it will screw with us.

Evolution is not only about advancing science at any cost. Responsibility.

How will it fuck it up exactly? Genetic mantipulation will allows to transgress our limitations, and help us save lives.

Nature is now sentient? Interisting. We should start the Church of Evolution. Lol. You are as bad as creationist.

[donnay]

How will it fuck it up exactly? Genetic mantipulation [sic] will allows to transgress our limitations, and help us save lives.


Your choice of words is REALLY telling...

Definition for Manipulation:
Web definitions: exerting shrewd or devious influence especially for one's own advantage; "his manipulation of his friends was scandalous".

Transgress - trans·gress/transˈgres/
Verb:

Infringe or go beyond the bounds of (a moral principle or other established standard of behavior).

You got that right, it will allow the 1% running the show to transgress upon others.

You know in a perfect world I would agree with you about advancements in science, but since we do not live in a perfect world, people have a right to know those whom are manipulating and transgressing upon other sentient beings.

[John F Kennedy III]

Your choice of words is REALLY telling...

Definition for Manipulation:
Web definitions: exerting shrewd or devious influence especially for one's own advantage; "his manipulation of his friends was scandalous".

Transgress - trans·gress/transˈgres/
Verb:

Infringe or go beyond the bounds of (a moral principle or other established standard of behavior).

You got that right, it will allow the 1% running the show to transgress upon others.

You know in a perfect world I would agree with you about advancements in science, but since we do not live in a perfect world, people have a right to know those whom are manipulating and transgressing upon other sentient beings.

This.

[american.swan]

This is all predictable to me. Personally, I believe the "super humans" before the flood created the dinosaurs. That's why they weren't on the ark. A mouse that tweets like a bird? I heard a rumor one scientist wants to recreate the dinosaurs from scratch. These articles in this thread plus the global economy all point to Christ's soon return.

[LawnWake]

I am sure that is just a coincidence. The government would NEVER harm it's citizens--Oh nooooooo. Hegelian Dialectic--Problem, reaction, solution! Problem: resurrect the 1918 Pandemic. Reaction: Some people die of mysterious disease that resembles that of the 1918 Spanish Influenza. Solution: Government will have antidote.

When did I say that the government should be involved? If you're going to play the 'I'm more libertarian than you game', go ahead I realy don't care about any of that, but you know.. I don't even believe government should exist so.. why would.. I think that. the government should spend tax money on anything, including genetic modification?


Nature is sentient. The more we screw with it, the more it will screw with us.

Actually, that's the thing. 'Screwing with' is a human concept, not a natural one. If humans didn't exist, there would be no one to judge what's 'good' or 'bad' for nature. So to say that we're 'screwing with nature' is completely illogical. We're not. We're surviving. Just because we're surviving in a way that is unlike previous organisms doesn't mean it's bad. It's like saying that the first animal with eyes is 'screwing with nature' because it too is putting new evolutionary pressures on its environment.

We're changing nature, sure and you know, every thing that has ever lived has changed nature. We're something new, new isn't necessarily bad, just different. So what if there's suddenly cows with 2 heads walking around? Just because we're used to 1 headed cows doesn't mean there's something inherently wrong with 2 headed ones.

[Anti Federalist]

Really? Is that all we have to do? Kind of like the government resurrecting and generically engineering the 1918 Spanish Flu (which had be eradicated), from a body of a frozen corpse who died of it.

That ^^^

Having the pleasure of knowing I was right is poor compensation when billions of people are choking chunks of their lungs up and dying of hemorrhagic pneumonia, or when whole species of plant foods are rendered infertile because of GMO cross contamination.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heY15iUzZZs

[donnay]

When did I say that the government should be involved? If you're going to play the 'I'm more libertarian than you game', go ahead I realy don't care about any of that, but you know.. I don't even believe government should exist so.. why would.. I think that. the government should spend tax money on anything, including genetic modification?

The example I presented is indeed the government who is behind these type genetic modifications--bio-warfare. Government is also allowing corporations and universities to do this genetic engineering. This isn't a pissing contest, this is mere dialog that I am presenting to say if you are all for the genetic modification, then you better be careful what you wish for!

I am all for limited government and transparency. The way our government was intended.

[Mach]

Just another day......


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqYDRxdgnC0

:toady:

[ryanmkeisling]

When did I say that the government should be involved? If you're going to play the 'I'm more libertarian than you game', go ahead I realy don't care about any of that, but you know.. I don't even believe government should exist so.. why would.. I think that. the government should spend tax money on anything, including genetic modification?



Actually, that's the thing. 'Screwing with' is a human concept, not a natural one. If humans didn't exist, there would be no one to judge what's 'good' or 'bad' for nature. So to say that we're 'screwing with nature' is completely illogical. We're not. We're surviving. Just because we're surviving in a way that is unlike previous organisms doesn't mean it's bad. It's like saying that the first animal with eyes is 'screwing with nature' because it too is putting new evolutionary pressures on its environment.

We're changing nature, sure and you know, every thing that has ever lived has changed nature. We're something new, new isn't necessarily bad, just different. So what if there's suddenly cows with 2 heads walking around? Just because we're used to 1 headed cows doesn't mean there's something inherently wrong with 2 headed ones.

We aren't surviving well at this point. I don't think you can argue that as it would just make you look illogical, or better yet idiotic.

How do you explain the exponential rise in disease and chronic disorders? How do you explain the fact that most people start their day with a hand full of supplements?

How do you explain the fact that the more soil scientists we get the less healthy, arable soil we have to work with? Every year we lose more to desertification. There is no evidence you can point to that society at large is thriving.

If you do not think nature is sentient you clearly haven't spent much time out in it. How does a morel mushroom "know" how to look like 50 different things surrounding it on the forest floor to produce successful camouflage? How does a venus fly trap "know" how to feed on insects and develop the means to do so?

Its funny you bring up cows with two heads, I was just talking to one of the elderly ranchers here in the valley where I live the other day and he mentioned that when they were spraying agent orange here in the 70's he had several years where his breedings produced just that, cows with two heads and they were essentially worthless as they had to be put down. He lost a lot of cattle to this sort of land abuse forcing him to give up dairying and switch to reliance on the beef commodity industry and his business never did rebound as regulation came in to deal the final death blow to his dairy farm. He has been almost poverty stricken since. The spraying of those chemicals also led to mass desertification. This valley has been used by humans for 10,000 years and europeans have only been here for 150. When the first europeans came and settled here during gold rush times in 1864, the native grass grew to 8 feet tall, today its mostly desert scrub and where there is still grass, it is lucky to get 2 feet! This year was the first year it was legal for them to plant the GMO alfalfa, and already the cows being fed on that stuff are having reproductive problems and still births just like has been happening to the animals fed on GMO corn and grains for the past decade. There is also less genetic diversity now so where will they breed a new cow from that can live and reproduce healthily on these grasses? A lab? That doesn't work they have already tried and those cows could not survive, in fact even regular cows could not survive being reproduced and fed in captivity. They have to do it in nature on healthy pasture and as time moves on there is less and less of that to work with here in the US, especially as the GMO alfalfa cross contaminates the native strains.

These things promised to feed the world but many in the world are starving miserably, so that was an absolute failure and as you would see if you opened your eyes a little bit, farmers around the world are rejecting this stuff because it is worthless and only makes them dependent on the companies selling the seed to them, the same companies that make the fertilizers, insecticides, and herbicides that are tailored to it. I could quote some more from my "sensationalist" book. I won't because I have no desire to argue with people like you and you will find out soon enough how bad it will get if we continue on this scientific path with no personal responsibility in how far it is taken. I suppose you would be content to eat your meals via pill form? Most people already do, just look at the amount of supplements are used, food itself used to provide all of that. That is where we are headed and people are not more healthy because of it. This stuff is only benefiting corporations not human beings and that cannot be refuted the evidence is widespread.

You are lucky there are farmers like me who don't buy the shit and do it the way it was done 100 years ago, bio-remeidiating the already destroyed once productive land. And producing food that makes people healthy rather than dependent on pharmaceuticals to stay alive. I am very surprised that you support Ron Paul as your rhetoric on this makes you seem like you support Obama as he is a corporate GMO guy all the way.

Look around you the world is not getting to be a better place, we are ready to self destruct, I think everybody here would agree with that.

[Endgame]

For fucks sake, this thread is like saying we shouldn't have airplanes because Boeing is run by assholes. Ridiculous technophobia.

[ryanmkeisling]

For fucks sake, this thread is like saying we shouldn't have airplanes because Boeing is run by assholes. Ridiculous technophobia.

Do you really think technology has made the world a better place? For fucks sake, I get your point...maybe in some cases but the balance has been unhinged. Boeing has caused more war and destruction than the ease of moving around in less time, over long distances and at greater ease. The automobile is a perfect example...

In your opinion is the world is flourishing because it gets easier and easier to destroy? Animals and plants naturally control their populations, we don't.

[Endgame]

Do you really think technology has made the world a better place? For fucks sake, I get your point...maybe in some cases but the balance has been unhinged. Boeing has caused more war and destruction than the ease of moving around in less time and at ease. The automobile is a perfect example...

I think large corporations, politicians, bureaucrats, pig cops, voters, and sadomasochists of all types have made the world a shitty place.

Technology, as far as I'm concerned, is wonderful without these people. I want a bioluminescent houseplant. I want robots mowing my lawn. I want to be able to change anything about my physical appearance with a cheap surgical operation. I want to stay 30 and healthy till the day something violent kills me. I want prosthetic eyes that can see in infrared, take photos, put nametags above all the people who's names I forget, put a big flashing arrow above my car in the parking lot, and send video games and porn directly into my brain.

[donnay]

For fucks sake, this thread is like saying we shouldn't have airplanes because Boeing is run by assholes. Ridiculous technophobia.

Boeing shouldn't be the only monopoly making planes...I think you ought to look at it from that point of view.

Our society is being controlled my technocrats. Technology, in of itself, is a good thing, but when it gets in the wrong hands, and a few hands, tyranny almost always seems to follow.

"None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free."

[Endgame]

Boeing shouldn't be the only monopoly making planes...I think you ought to look at it from that point of view.

Our society is being controlled my technocrats. Technology, in of itself, is a good thing, but when it gets in the wrong hands, and a few hands, tyranny almost always seems to follow.

"None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free."

Which is more or less exactly what I said at the end of page 13.

[donnay]

Which is more or less exactly what I said at the end of page 13.

I dunno your comment sounds very jaded. You made the comment before that, which I commented on, about having technophobia. I explained that our society is being controlled by technocrats--that's not technophobia. Just trying to clarify my position.

[PaulConventionWV]

I'm actually just saying that if you don't agree with it, don't financially endorse it and that the assumption that scientists aren't regular people with as much common sense as anybody else and are out to destroy the world reeks of fear of the unknown. I've said myself that there are some legitemate concerns before, but people blow it out of proportions and start fear mongering as if it's the end of the world. 'Unforeseeable consequences' are just that, you can't foresee them and existence itself is full of them, so why single out genetic modifcation?

First society scares us with global cooling, then global warming and pig flu and who knows what else and now it's genetically modified food.

The scientists are supplying a demand and they're only responsible for their products. It's farmers who are responsible for their crops and consumers who are responsible for their groceries. It's funny how no one seems to blame any farmer for using it and hell, PaulConvention doesn't even blame himself (the consumer) for buying it (because it's cheaper and he believes that the government should make his prefered product cheaper) and everyone's raging on those scientists who play God. Share a little responsibility here.



Uh yeah, that wasn't the argument. He was saying that genetic modification can have bad unforeseen consequences; everything can. Period. So why suddenly draw a magic line because 'they can alter our DNA'? You know that sunlight can alter your DNA as well, right? In your lifetime?



Property rights are the problem here, or a lack thereof. Not genetically modified food.



Do your research? If it's so important to you, you would spend the extra few bucks on it. There's a reason it's more expensive and it's up to you, the consumer, to ultimately decide what the product's worth and if you want to comply with the price. If you want the government to control the market because you don't want to spend more money on certain products or do your own research, that's fine. I don't want that.

The reason it's expensive is because it's become scarce in the market. If we truly had a free market, it would be the norm, not the exception. The whole reason we have to spend more money on it is because the government has favorites and it's not on the side of organic products.

[PaulConventionWV]

Animals and plants naturally control their populations, we don't.

How do you know this? Can you provide documentation?

[ryanmkeisling]

I think large corporations, politicians, bureaucrats, pig cops, voters, and sadomasochists of all types have made the world a shitty place.

Technology, as far as I'm concerned, is wonderful without these people. I want a bioluminescent houseplant. I want robots mowing my lawn. I want to be able to change anything about my physical appearance with a cheap surgical operation. I want to stay 30 and healthy till the day something violent kills me. I want prosthetic eyes that can see in infrared, take photos, put nametags above all the people who's names I forget, put a big flashing arrow above my car in the parking lot, and send video games and porn directly into my brain.

So your idea of freedom is lazy, slovenly, self entitled, and will end up in just the situation your forum name implies. You are essentially a destructionist. You are also not ready or responsible enough for the society you seek. How did you find your way here? You are just the type of American that has put our country in its current predicament. You sound like a spoiled teenager, who could use a good old country ass kicking.

[PaulConventionWV]

I think large corporations, politicians, bureaucrats, pig cops, voters, and sadomasochists of all types have made the world a shitty place.

Technology, as far as I'm concerned, is wonderful without these people. I want a bioluminescent houseplant. I want robots mowing my lawn. I want to be able to change anything about my physical appearance with a cheap surgical operation. I want to stay 30 and healthy till the day something violent kills me. I want prosthetic eyes that can see in infrared, take photos, put nametags above all the people who's names I forget, put a big flashing arrow above my car in the parking lot, and send video games and porn directly into my brain.

Then you are one sick fuck. Technology like that is just another tool to control people. It's always the next new thing to keep people distracted from what's really important in life, which is NOT making yourself more comfortable and making your life less meaningful because you spend your days coddled in a tech box with all your little creature comforts. It's sickening how people embrace things like this instead of being wary of technology. After all, did nature not bring us to what we are? I don't care what you believe, nature is a wondeful thing, and I think it brings testament to God's great works. But if you believe we should sacrifice the natural part of our lives in order to wrap our selves in our technology and lose the simplicity that nature offers, then we are in real trouble and life has become ultimately meaningless, except to chase the next human invention that makes your life a little less eventful and more easy to just glide through.

[Cutlerzzz]

So your idea of freedom is lazy, slovenly, self entitled, and will end up in just the situation your forum name implies. You are essentially a destructionist. You are also not ready or responsible enough for the society you seek. How did you find your way here? You are just the type of American that has put our country in its current predicament. You sound like a spoiled teenager, who could use a good old country ass kicking.Quite the tough guy, eh?

[ryanmkeisling]

How do you know this? Can you provide documentation?

Sure its called a predator prey relationship and survival of the fittest. We have no predators beyond ourselves, and through all of this scientific imbalance we are preying on ourselves and we have government programs to take care of those of us who aren't fit to survive, at the expense of those who can. In nature, balance always happens because nature doesn't care, just go into a forest, there is a thing called the food chain. When forests or wild place get over managed by human intervention things fall out of balance, there are plenty of examples.

When I farm I mimic nature, create healthy soils teaming with microbic life and the plants live within symbiotic relationships (legumes like peas and beans are nitrogen fixing, they pull nitrogen right from the atmosphere where it is free and abundant and they feed the soils microflora (which can also fix nitrogen from the atmosphere and minerals through chelation) which in turn feeds many other species of plants which cannot perform this function) and do not get overcome by weeds or require fertilizers, pesticides or herbicides, the animals do not require medication because they have healthy diets rich in minerals and micronutrients from the plants and the soil which their waste products feed (it is one big system) and are not overpopulated and I have abundance, so much so that I make a healthy living from it, in many cases I cannot meet demand for the products I produce. It is almost a self sustaining system(s.) Biodynamics and permaculture are worth studying but there is no profit in them other than they are sustainable and therefore the greedy could care less. I also make money teaching this stuff to other farmers and gardeners, but they could learn it themselves just by observing nature it is free knowledge all around us, if we weren't distracted by entertainment and technology.

And all people have to do is come to the farm and see this at work, rather than trust the government or someone else to verify it for them.

In turn all of the products of the farm support healthy human life and I am making more money every year as people wake up to these facts. I have not had even a cold in the past 5 years (since I started farming these systems) and I have had type 1 insulin dependent diabetes for 21 years, since the age of 13. I am gradually reducing the amount of insulin I require, slowly but surly, simply by living this way and my doctor cannot figure out why since the rest of his patients have horrible complications, and continue to require more and more insulin to survive.

I used to be a professional chef and hardcore drug addict living in Boston and NYC and had horrible complications myself, autonomic and peripheral neuropathy, brittle diabetic control, nerve damage the doctors told me I would never heal from, I am now more healthy than most 34 year olds walking around. So I just don't believe in this stuff I know, for a fact it is true and it is the way to healthy living. I do not just come on here and run my mouth about things I know nothing about, I live this life, for real.

[ryanmkeisling]

Quite the tough guy, eh?

Not really, I have lived a tough life, tough enough to know when I see overindulgence and a poor, spoiled, entitled attitude part of the reason America is now in the position it is in.. You don't think that post sounds like a spoiled teenager?

[Cutlerzzz]

For fucks sake, this thread is like saying we shouldn't have airplanes because Boeing is run by assholes. Ridiculous technophobia.

A good number of posters on this board cannot be reasoned with, and have their own interests in mind when it comes to limiting government and supporting freedom. Remember that.


Do you really think technology has made the world a better place? For fucks sake, I get your point...maybe in some cases but the balance has been unhinged. Boeing has caused more war and destruction than the ease of moving around in less time and at ease. The automobile is a perfect example...

In your opinion is the world flourishing because it gets easier and easier to destroy? Animals and plants naturally control their populations, we don't.

I can't tell if I am taking this post out of context or not. Are you claiming that we are not better off with modern technology?

[Cutlerzzz]

Not really, I have lived a tough life, tough enough to know when I see overindulge and a poor, spoiled attitude.. You don't think that post sounds like a spoiled teenager?I think that he sounds like an individual who has his own subjective preferences, and was telling us what some of his harmless future goals are. He was also possibly making a joke.

Virtually all of us have an easy life compared to what we had 200 years ago (or 100 years ago, or at any point in human history prior to this). Just about anyone today would be called "spoiled" by anyone from 1800. The cause of this is technology and capital increasing production. 200 years from now, 20 hours a week will be considered a full time job, and they will consider this generation tough for working 40 hours a week.

[ryanmkeisling]

A good number of posters on this board cannot be reasoned with, and have their own interests in mind when it comes to limiting government and supporting freedom.



I can't tell if I am taking this post out of context or not. Are you claiming that we are not better off with modern technology?

No I am not, There are many forms of technology I adore, just that when we upset the balance of things by not being responsible for the technologies we use we invite a certain level of disaster. The world will move forward either way, we can do it the hard way like we do now and allow our selves to be governed or we can govern ourselves through responsible action like the founders intended. That is all I mean to say...although admittedly I lack brevity.

[ryanmkeisling]

I think that he sounds like an individual who has his own subjective preferences, and was telling us what some of his harmless future goals are. He was also possibly making a joke.

Virtually all of us have an easy life compared to what we had 200 years ago (or 100 years ago, or at any point in human history prior to this). Just about anyone today would be called "spoiled" by anyone from 1800. The cause of this is technology and capital increasing production. 200 years from now, 20 hours a week will be considered a full time job, and they will consider this generation tough for working 40 hours a week.

And the world lacks certain appreciations and is cascading into a certain oblivion. Can you imagine what a world like you presuppose will look like? I hate to be a pessimist but I don't think it will look to good and most of the old timers I know would agree and would prefer if things had moved at a different pace and a different way. Power and greed have done and will continue to do much to influence this. I don't work half as hard as farmers did 200 years ago and my systems are even better for the surrounding environment but I do it responsibly rather than focusing on profit and ease. It is all about developing the right systems and ones that are not based solely on profit, because greed is unsustainable.

I think goals are important. If the goal is to be lazy, have everything handed to us and jerk off to porn all day rather than be productive and responsible we will get the product of those things. That doesn't mean we cannot still enjoy life it just means we have to put some thought into rather than always looking for the easy way out. I love what I do, I don't even consider it work! I wake up at 5 am every day even in these blistering cold winters and cannot wait to tend to the animals and gardens. I live at 5200' elevation in the mountains, it would be a brutal life for some but it is all a matter of attitude.

Capital may have increased production but it also is worthless at this point. There is only so much to go around? If we continue to over populate where do we go from here? Just like in economic terms unsustained exponential growth is unsustainable? Isn't that one of the main points of our little movement. If the Fed just continues to print money the money becomes, nothing? If we just continue to produce children, we will become nothing because we will run out of space to feed and house us all, not to mention health concerns like we are already seeing. If science and technology are the answer they better hurry to catch up or it will be over soon enough. Unrestrained exponential growth is never a good thing in any sector, it is not working now and it will not work in the future.

Many of you clearly have not thought this through...

[Cutlerzzz]

And the world lacks certain appreciations and is cascading into a certain oblivion. Can you imagine what a world like you presuppose will look like? I hate to be a pessimist but I don't think it will look to good and most of the old timers I know would agree and would prefer if things had moved at a different pace and a different way. Power and greed have done and will continue to do much to influence this. I don't work half as hard as farmers did 200 years ago and my systems are even better for the surrounding environment but I do it responsibly rather than focusing on profit and ease. It is all about developing the right systems and ones that are not based solely on profit, because greed is unsustainable.

I think goals are important. If the goal is to be lazy, have everything handed to us and jerk off to porn all day rather than be productive and responsible we will get the product of those things. That doesn't mean we cannot still enjoy life it just means we have to put some thought into rather than always looking for the easy way out. I love what I do, I don't even consider it work! I wake up at 5 am every day even in these blistering cold winters and cannot wait to tend to the animals and gardens. I live at 5200' elevation in the mountains, it would be a brutal life for some but it is all a matter of attitude.

Capital may have increased production but it also is worthless at this point. There is only so much to go around? If we continue to over populate where do we go from here? Just like in economic terms unsustained exponential growth is unsustainable? Isn't that one of the main points of our little movement. If the Fed just continues to print money the money becomes, nothing? If we just continue to produce children, we will become nothing because we will run out of space to feed and house us all, not to mention health concerns like we are already seeing. If science and technology are the answer they better hurry to catch up or it will be over soon enough. Unrestrained exponential growth is never a good thing in any sector, it is not working now and it will not work in the future.

Many of you clearly have not thought this through...Old timers are often afraid of change. That does not mean that change is bad.

The fact that you don't have to work as hard as farmers did 200 years ago is a great thing. If you want to, the option is still there, but there is no need. I hope that within 100 years, people will be so productive that there is no need to work. If they want to, the option would still be there to work (and increase their wealth even more), but that it would not be needed as a robot can be easily acquired and make the modern equivilent of $100,000+ a year.

I see nothing unsustainable about greed in a free market based system. Could you explain on that, or am I misinterpreting that statement?


Capital may have increased production but it also is worthless at this point. There is only so much to go around? If we continue to over populate where do we go from here? Just like in economic terms unsustained exponential growth is unsustainable? Isn't that one of the main points of our little movement. If the Fed just continues to print money the money becomes, nothing? If we just continue to produce children, we will become nothing because we will run out of space to feed and house us all, not to mention health concerns like we are already seeing. If science and technology are the answer they better hurry to catch up or it will be over soon enough. Unrestrained exponential growth is never a good thing in any sector, it is not working now and it will not work in the future.

Many of you clearly have not thought this through...

Capital is not worthless. If not for capital, we are just cavemen (and we don't even get clubs).

There is nothing unsustainable about growth based on increases in capital, and technological innovation. That is real growth. Printing money encourages an unsustainable economic growth by distorting the capital structure, as opposed to increasing our production capacity in manufacturing or agriculture, or skills in the service sector.

The idea that the Earth (much less the US) is overpopulated is false. People have been saying it for hundreds of years, and yet today starvation is far less common than it was hundreds of years ago; we have actually gotten rid of hunger is much of the world for the first time in human history, while there is less starvation in most of the third world. Life expectancies are now far higher than ever due to improved technology. Nobody in the world from 1800 would believe you if you told them that the average American lives to be nearly 80. Even if much of the food we eat today is unhealthy, we also now have access to various health foods from around the world that did not exist ever before in human history, or were just unavailable. People have the options now to eat healthier than ever before (and they also have the various exercise programs available now that never previously existed), but many just choose not to use them. The technology is there, but people just decide they don't want to use it, and that is their right.

[ryanmkeisling]

Your living in a dream world if you believe that. You obviously haven't been outside of the US or Europe? 6 million people are estimated to have died of starvation last year and another 925 million are malnourished or underfed. If you have been to africa or india or many other third world nations you could see this with your own eyes. Your standard of living is far to high that you are uninformed and believe the world outside to be a utopia which it isn't. I am done even arguing with you about it as you have no clue, I have seen it up close...

[Cutlerzzz]

Your living in a dream world if you believe that. You obviously haven't been outside of the US or Europe? 6 million people are estimated to have died of starvation last year and another 925 million are malnourished or underfed. If you have been to africa or india or many other third world nations you could see this with your own eyes. Your standard of living is far to high that you are uninformed and believe the world outside to be a utopia which it isn't. I am done even arguing with you about it as you have no clue, I have seen it up close...No, you're uninformed if you think that it has not gotten better in most of the world. India now has a small and growing middle class, as does China. Europe, the US, Oceania, Japan, and parts of Asia have eliminated starvation all together. Latin America is now much better off than it was a two hundred years ago. Parts of the Middle East have become rich off of oil, and even parts of Africa now have some wealth.

http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/02/poverty-in-numbers-changing-state-of.html

http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/global-poverty-rate-trend.jpg?w=557&h=352

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/Su2motDBoJI/AAAAAAAAL1o/5CUTsmSOxu0/s400/poverty2.jpg

http://blog.oecdfactblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/poverty.png



You're basing this off of ancedotes and preconceived notions it would appear, as opposed to hard facts.

[John F Kennedy III]

I should probably introduce you guys to a thing called the NWO. It's gonna throw a mighty big monkey wrench in your hopes for the future.

[osan]

Doing genetic manipulation with human embryos is a bit scetchy, but doing it with animals is perfectly fine imo.

Why is it OK with one and not with the other? What is the basis for your belief?

[osan]

My question is how accurate, true if you will, is any of this?

I am highly suspicious of the wisdom of all this genetic monkeying about, but I am also cautious of precipitous reactions against it. I am not convinced that all genetic manipulation is of necessity bad. I do, however, feel we could be moving forward far too rapidly, especially when materials from one species is spliced into that of another. I mean, crossing a human with a pig? I suppose the propriety depends largely on the nature of the crossing.

Even so, this area of endeavor appears to be perhaps a penultimate candidate for unintended consequences. I have seen nothing that even vaguely leads me to believe that the knowledge these so-called "genetic engineers" hold represents do much as the smallest epsilon of what may be required to play safely in this way. Indeed, terming then "engineer" seems to me to an indication of the hubris driven egos in question, which I suspect is an eminently dangerous way to proceed. IMO this area of endeavor needs to be undertaken with the utmost caution and at a slow pace to allow any unforeseen consequences to become apparent. Even then this strikes me as very risky business, but going at what appears to be breakneck speed is almost certainly unsound in the wildest way imaginable.

If we know nothing else about biological systems, it is that we know not enough about them and that they continually manage to surprise us. How about the tube worms that live in some 20K feet of water by volcanic vent in 700*F water that is full of compounds that would kill a human being in no time flat? Such life was so very confidently deemed "impossible" by the infallibly learned "scientists" who then had to wash a lot of egg from their arrogant faces and eat great steaming piles of crow. What makes any intelligent and circumspect man think that one can go here and assume no trespass?

[Anti Federalist]

Old timers are often afraid of change. That does not mean that change is bad.

That is because "old timers", like myself, have lived long enough to watch as these technological terrors get unleashed, weigh them in the balance and find them lacking.

I weep for a future that will not know what it is like like to walk the earth and not be under some form of electronic surveillance, and what's worse, doesn't even care, that their pursuit of entertainment, leisure and consumption is considered more important than their freedom.

When you create a society in which man is redundant and superfluous, he will rise to that expectation, thus achieving the worst of both worlds, culturally and politically the "Idiocracy" combined with a world wide, high tech, police state prison grid.

It's a sad dichotomy of human nature, but yet true:

Adversity makes men, prosperity makes monsters.

[Cutlerzzz]

I should probably introduce you guys to a thing called the NWO. It's gonna throw a mighty big monkey wrench in your hopes for the future.The guy who joined the board a couple months ago and started this thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?334429-The-Politicians-We-Can-Trust&p=3802242#post3802242) should not lecture anyone on the dangers of government.

[Cutlerzzz]

That is because "old timers", like myself, have lived long enough to watch as these technological terrors get unleashed, weigh them in the balance and find them lacking.

I weep for a future that will not know what it is like like to walk the earth and not be under some form of electronic surveillance, and what's worse, doesn't even care, that their pursuit of entertainment, leisure and consumption is considered more important than their freedom.

When you create a society in which man is redundant and superfluous, he will rise to that expectation, thus achieving the worst of both worlds, culturally and politically the "Idiocracy" combined with a world wide, high tech, police state prison grid.

It's a sad dichotomy of human nature, but yet true:

Adversity makes men, prosperity makes monsters.If you had your way, we would be living in the Stone Age.

[donnay]

If you had your way, we would be living in the Stone Age.

And if you had it your way we would be living under the iron fist of technocrats...oh wait! we already are there! :rolleyes:

[Cutlerzzz]

And if you had it your way we would be living under the iron fist of technocrats...oh wait! we already are there! :rolleyes:Coming from the statist that wants the government to protect him?

[donnay]

Coming from the statist that wants the government to protect him?

I am not statist. I do not want government to protect me whatsoever--I want government to butt-out of my life and I want government to go back to the limited government our founders set up.

[Cutlerzzz]

I am not statist. I do not want government to protect me whatsoever--I want government to butt-out of my life and I want government to go back to the limited government our founders set up.You want tariffs to increase and for the government to ban various firms from buying property or opening stores.

[donnay]

You want tariffs to increase and for the government to ban various firms from buying property or opening stores.

Tariffs are a constitutional source of revenue.

[John F Kennedy III]

The guy who joined the board a couple months ago and started this thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?334429-The-Politicians-We-Can-Trust&p=3802242#post3802242) should not lecture anyone on the dangers of government.

I will lecture whoever and however I want. Nice try playing pretend with my intentions on that thread. Somehow you think that makes the NWO irrelevant...

[John F Kennedy III]

Coming from the statist that wants the government to protect him?

Lol. One joke after another from you...

[Cutlerzzz]

I will lecture whoever and however I want. Nice try playing pretend with my intentions on that thread. Somehow you think that makes the NWO irrelevant...I'm sure you intend well. I just don't think you understand much.

[donnay]

I'm sure you intend well. I just don't think you understand much.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vh78T--ZUxY

[John F Kennedy III]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vh78T--ZUxY

LOL. +rep

[libertygrl]

I've heard he had Globalist connections, I've yet to research it though.


As a member of the Fabian Socialists, HG Wells supported a gradualistic take over of the world system with the end game being establishment of a totalitarian socialist global system.

His book, "War of the Worlds" is a metaphor of the Open Conspiracy with a twist. The Martian Invasion was drastic, visible, and sudden and ended in their defeat by earth´s own immunological controls. The Open Conspiracy is, however, a call for a more subtle "gentler and kinder invasion" where the invasion is gradual, unseen, and incremental... so to stay below the level of the immunological reaction of the world´s population. In short, the Fabian Society is the HIV/AIDS of political subversion... attack and rot within and decapitate the government´s "immune system."

For anyone intelligent, study Well´s book "An Open Conspiracy"; study the British Fabian Society; study the totalitarian leanings of HG Wells and the relationship of the Fabians to the Theosophists and Satanists.

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1262817/pg1



From an Amazon reviewer:

H.G Wells was a propagandist and social engineer that worked for the world elites. How much of his work was from his own mind and how much he was told directly to write is debatable. Its common knowledge Wells was more or less a basketcase that could be easily controlled, so that, along with his talent for writing made him the perfect man for the job. He was an open Fabian Socialist which wants a centralized world government but they consider themselves to be kinder and gentler enlightened types as opposed to the Fascists and Communists. The difference could be likened to giving a dog thats tied in the yard with four feet of rope, instead of the two feet of rope that the Commies and Fascists give you.

The Open Conspiracy calls for various things that either have been implemented since like a centralized world bank controlling all money creation, which all "world citizens" (at this point in time unwittingly) would pay a tax into. He also calls for eliminating property ownership, replacing individual land owners with "householders" or "tenants." Wells being the generous enlightened type that he is does think that to a degree the "householder" should be allowed to "fashion his house and garden after his own desire." Oh how kind of you Mr. Wells!!!

Other choice things discussed in The Open Conspiracy, and these are direct quotes, are Wells talking about the need for a "mental sanitation process" where feelings of nationalism are to be replaced with an acceptance being a "world citizen". Wells says the main objective of the "Open Conspiracy" in the early stages of the social engineering process is to "disentangle all traditions, loyalties, and time honored ideas", meaning loyalty to ones country, race and family. He also calls for education reform to have education that pushes "the cause of world reconstruction" as well as publishing books that push this idea and making sure all libraries are stocked with them. He also says the Open Conspiracy must "impose freedom". Any of this sound familiar to you?

In some ways this book is similar to the Protocols, very boring to read, but amazing for the blatant example of the world controllers openly flaunting what they had planned to do and have done or are in the process of doing. Like I said boring but you should probably read this if you want to decipher the globalist beast.

http://www.amazon.com/Open-Conspiracy-What-Are-Lives/dp/1585092754/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1323734379&sr=1-2

[Endgame]

My question is how accurate, true if you will, is any of this?

I am highly suspicious of the wisdom of all this genetic monkeying about, but I am also cautious of precipitous reactions against it. I am not convinced that all genetic manipulation is of necessity bad. I do, however, feel we could be moving forward far too rapidly, especially when materials from one species is spliced into that of another. I mean, crossing a human with a pig? I suppose the propriety depends largely on the nature of the crossing.

Even so, this area of endeavor appears to be perhaps a penultimate candidate for unintended consequences. I have seen nothing that even vaguely leads me to believe that the knowledge these so-called "genetic engineers" hold represents do much as the smallest epsilon of what may be required to play safely in this way. Indeed, terming then "engineer" seems to me to an indication of the hubris driven egos in question, which I suspect is an eminently dangerous way to proceed. IMO this area of endeavor needs to be undertaken with the utmost caution and at a slow pace to allow any unforeseen consequences to become apparent. Even then this strikes me as very risky business, but going at what appears to be breakneck speed is almost certainly unsound in the wildest way imaginable.

If we know nothing else about biological systems, it is that we know not enough about them and that they continually manage to surprise us. How about the tube worms that live in some 20K feet of water by volcanic vent in 700*F water that is full of compounds that would kill a human being in no time flat? Such life was so very confidently deemed "impossible" by the infallibly learned "scientists" who then had to wash a lot of egg from their arrogant faces and eat great steaming piles of crow. What makes any intelligent and circumspect man think that one can go here and assume no trespass?

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/9.12/aqtest.html

Take quiz. Post results.