User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 15

Thread: Evolution machine

  1. #1
    Igneous Magma sthack99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    312
    Threads
    14
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Evolution machine

    Evolution machine: Genetic engineering on fast forward - life - 27 June 2011 - New Scientist

    "The invention of a machine that puts evolution on fast-forward, generating new organisms in days rather than years, promises an industrial revolution for biology. But that's just the beginning: its inventors think they can use it to rewrite the very language of life – and even make new kinds of human."
    With the invention of this machine, do you think everyone will finally accept Evolution as fact? And does this cross the line into the realm of "immorality"?


  2. #2
    Molten Ash neochronomo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    62
    Threads
    1
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: sthack99 View Post
    With the invention of this machine, do you think everyone will finally accept Evolution as fact? And does this cross the line into the realm of "immorality"?
    I don't think it'll ever be the case -- at least not for a very long time -- that everyone or nearly everyone accepts evolution as fact.

    As for it crossing the line, I would say it depends on what they mean by "new kinds of human". In the rest of the article it discusses a possibility that we may be able to make ourselves virus proof, which I would say is a moral thing to do. You can make the argument that there may be unforeseen, negative consequences in the distant future from messing with our genes, but I'm sure it could be studied and tested for safety like anything else we do to and put in ourselves (e.g. medicine, surgery, Fruit Loops, braces).

    "I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work." - Thomas Alva Edison

  3. #3
    Igneous Magma
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    431
    Threads
    2
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Those disavowing evolution have already proved themselves immune to evidence and reason. Why should they change now?


  4. #4
    Igneous Magma sthack99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    312
    Threads
    14
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Because their entire argument is that macroevolution has never been witnessed. But now it can be. So what will their argument be next?

    I would love for anti-evolutionists to chime in. I know if I had put this in the religion/philosophy category I would have gotten some bites, but I didn't think it belonged there....


  5. #5
    Lobotomized Angry Citizen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    11,107
    Threads
    181
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    10
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Why would this change anyone's mind? The objection many creationists raise is that humans CAN cause tremendous change through the use of intelligence, but that it's artificial. They claim that nature cannot replicate this kind of change. If anything, this will just make them feel more secure, not less.

    A man said to the universe:
    "Sir, I exist!"
    "However," replied the universe,
    "The fact has not created in me
    A sense of obligation."


    -- Stephen Crane

  6. #6
    blasphemer grandpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    20,678
    Threads
    596
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    3
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: Angry Citizen View Post
    Why would this change anyone's mind?
    The objection many creationists raise is that humans CAN cause
    tremendous change through the use of intelligence, but that it's
    artificial.
    They can't even begin to answer the questions, which is why they turn to God.

    That being said, plenty of religious people are intelligent and well-rounded.
    Nikola Tesla's dad, for example:
    "I longed to be an engineer, but my father was
    inflexible. He was the son of an officer who served in the
    army of the Great Napoleon and in common with his brother, professor of
    mathematics in a prominent institution, had received a military
    education; but, singularly enough, later embraced the clergy in which vocation he
    achieved eminence. He was a very erudite man, a veritable natural
    philosopher, poet and writer and his sermons were said to be as eloquent
    as those of Abraham a-Sancta-Clara."
    Nikola Tesla - Early Life Of Nikola Tesla

    Grandpa h.

    Post by post, building his arguments by smashing a couple of theirs -- for America.

  7. #7
    Volcanic Erupter
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,641
    Threads
    44
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: sthack99 View Post
    Because their entire argument is that macroevolution has never been witnessed. But now it can be. So what will their argument be next?
    Oh, that is by no means their entire argument. They have tons of arguments, all of them wrong but if you take one away they'll just change the subject to a completely new "argument" and proceed from there instead.

    YouTube - 65 Million Years With A Creationist.

    Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever.--Napoleon Bonaparte

  8. #8
    Hot Lava crimethinker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Midwestern US
    Posts
    798
    Threads
    7
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I was watching Star Trek: Deep Space Nine recently. The episode was about a dispute between a Federation-run school on the space station that primarily taught Bajoran children and Vedek Winn, a spiritual leader of Bajor, the planet the space station orbits. Vedek Winn wanted the teacher to ignore certain aspects of science, like evolution and the origin of the universe.

    I thought, "Damn, even in the 24th century..."

    I'm less certain that such things will still happen in the technologically advanced future, when all have access to a free and better education, but more importantly I'm not certain they won't.

    For a void without a question is just perverse.

  9. #9
    Volcanic Erupter SoylentGreen's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,497
    Threads
    299
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: sthack99 View Post
    Because their entire argument is that macroevolution has never been witnessed. But now it can be. So what will their argument be next?

    I would love for anti-evolutionists to chime in. I know if I had put this in the religion/philosophy category I would have gotten some bites, but I didn't think it belonged there....
    I think it obvious what they would say. Man created a machine that creates evolution, therefore evolution is intelligently designed QED


  10. #10
    blasphemer grandpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    20,678
    Threads
    596
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    3
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: SoylentGreen View Post
    I think it obvious what they would say.
    Man created a machine that creates evolution, therefore evolution is
    intelligently designed QED
    True, and I'm not so stupid as to try reguting that logic, as that's a surprisingly decent argument in this case. However, it still doesn't explain animals as we see them today, and especially not in the past.

    Grandpa h.

    Post by post, building his arguments by smashing a couple of theirs -- for America.

  11. #11
    Igneous Magma
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    206
    Threads
    15
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    20
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: sthack99 View Post
    Because their entire argument is that macroevolution has never been witnessed. But now it can be. So what will their argument be next?
    This isn't macroevolution in the sense that it is generally used. It is human intervention in the normal processes of biology. It is in fact a process by which a group of very intelligent scientists are trying to design new organisms.


  12. #12
    Hot Lava
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    825
    Threads
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    While it is human intervention, the process takes place very similarly to how evolution does.

    (1) It causes new genes to be introduced
    (2) Selects populations with particular genes/traits of interest

    Both are analogous of natural processes. The first happens naturally through mutation, translocation, and other well-studied processes that are known to happen regularly in sexually and asexually reproducing organisms. The second happens in nature through the process of natural selection - differential reproductive success based on survival/sexual selection traits.

    So yes, while it is a human invention, it's essentially engineering faster evolution in directions that natural pressures would not go.

    Pro scientia et humanitate.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •