First Synthetic Lifeform

Pretty much just opened a new Pandora's Box
Check it out

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/may/20/craig-venter-synthetic-life-genome

Shit...

Does this mean that Zombies can actually be made?

Maybe....

It has begun...

This is 'actually' the intro to Jurassic Park. Go on, have a look.

Almost word for word.

Well guys, this is it.

We're all going to die...

Hey man you got some gene mods?

...Some gene mods? Gene mods?

All jokes aside, this is a huge deal. It could be applied to almost any field, such as the production of (literally) greener fuel, or more importantly the distant possibility of terraforming mars with organisms specifically engineered for the climate.

Thats true, but is it ethical to intrude on an alien world not knowing whether or not it harbors life already?

Yes. Yes it is.

If it doesn't help us in some way, fuck it. We have to look out for ourselves first.

Extra-Earth colonization is the only possible future that humanity has for survival. We cannot have an infinitely expanding population with finite land. Finite land that we have already burdened and overused, that is. There is no life on the surface of the planet, and so terraforming the atmosphere will have no impact on what native organisms may exist beneath the surface.

Dud Doodoo wrote:Extra-Earth colonization is the only possible future that humanity has for survival. We cannot have an infinitely expanding population with finite land. Finite land that we have already burdened and overused, that is. There is no life on the surface of the planet, and so terraforming the atmosphere will have no impact on what native organisms may exist beneath the surface.

Except we ain't going to get to that level of overpopulation. Industrialization and wealth leads to fewer kids.

Hell, Sweden, Japan, and South Korea aren't even near replacement levels.

Ringleader wrote:Thats true, but is it ethical to intrude on an alien world not knowing whether or not it harbors life already?

They ain't human. They don't matter.

Unless they have nukes and one Hell of a delivery system, in which case we welcome them to the fold and apply for Visas.

Rasq'uire'laskar wrote:

Dud Doodoo wrote:Extra-Earth colonization is the only possible future that humanity has for survival. We cannot have an infinitely expanding population with finite land. Finite land that we have already burdened and overused, that is. There is no life on the surface of the planet, and so terraforming the atmosphere will have no impact on what native organisms may exist beneath the surface.

Except we ain't going to get to that level of overpopulation. Industrialization and wealth leads to fewer kids.

Hell, Sweden, Japan, and South Korea aren't even near replacement levels.

Ringleader wrote:Thats true, but is it ethical to intrude on an alien world not knowing whether or not it harbors life already?

They ain't human. They don't matter.

Unless they have nukes and one Hell of a delivery system, in which case we welcome them to the fold and apply for Visas.

...

Who are you, and what have you done with Rasq?

Not at all dud, if we support a society that allows the population to expand well beyond the carrying capacity of the earth NOW (without knowing or having any intention of shipping 12 billion people to Mars in the next 20 years?), then there is an inherent problem with our society NOW. Moreover it is irresponsible for a governing body to create scarcity and massive underlaying sociological problems by rewarding the unnecessary population explosion. There are several very easy amends that could very easily change this, such as applied statistical models that tie into the way our government distributes resources.

No one has to get exterminated, no one has to get lined up and shot, no nuclear weapons falling over our major population centers, no genocide, none of that. In 100 years, our population could be cut in half without anyone giving up any liberties.

Who likes a crowded world anyway? Isn't that kind of against human nature? Wanting MORE competition? You want more trouble getting a job? It's not something you should want even if these people do get shipped off on to some far away planet in a true, sci-fi like manner. Why is facilitating as many human beings as possible, and stretching our limited resources as thinly as possible across a grossly oversized population such an obsession to people nowadays? Remember how the Krogans nearly took over the galaxy because they were no longer confined to their harsh environment? well, thats kind of what's happening now right? I mean, what's going to stop anyone from having as many children as possible? the government that rewards such poor social infrastructure by paying for people to have 20+ children? The medical industry that tries to integrate our whithering physiology with costly medical crutches? Sure, I'll use medicine, I honestly don't believe it's a good idea in the very long run, but that's how I was raised, and what am I going to do about that?

I wouldn't consider myself inherently successful, (eyeglasses, asthma, I'm a wreck!) and such a society would most certainly be more of a bad thing then a good thing on a personal scale, but I understand how important it is that our legacy be preserved through a functioning and self sustaining society. So we would not NEED to fly off to other planets so that EVERY poor soul on our then crowded planet can have somewhere to live, but don't get me wrong, I fully support extraterrestrial exploration.

Lets imagine a government that gives privileges to people who apply themselves and work hard. These people are by definition successful and good analogues for those whom in the past spawned us through evolution. Now, this government would not deny people the rights to anything or even enforce anything, it wouldn't even have to, if it simply creates incentives for people to apply themselves, then those same people that in the past would have capitalized on the natural world in the past would also capitalize in this type of society. This government will be limited, and will function solely on the pretense of limited resources (AS IT SHOULD NOOOOOWWWW!!!!), and this scarcity will spawn competition that will cause successful people to rise above their peers. Again, no one has to die from this, in fact, by forcing people to be responsible and make responsible decisions, it is highly unlikely that people will shoot themselves in the foot by dooming their genetic linage (personal gain (what people truly seek out in life) indirectly equals genetic linage).

Sometimes, lionesses will kill their own young so that their other offspring may be well fed enough to grow into healthy lions and lionesses themselves (so that the other offspring have a greater share of the kills their mother makes, not that they eat their sibling). I would consider this an insurance policy more then anything, because a lioness doesn't know how much food will be available to her and her young in the future, therefore by maximizing the chances for success is evolutionarily advantageous. An intelligent human being that knows that they are accountable for their actions, and can make decisions based on previous information can and will and DO act in a way that benefits themselves the most, which includes among other things, NOT HAVING 500 BABIES!

The same function I mentioned above can be observed in virtually every form of life on earth, its simple logic really. The queen ant laying an egg every 10 seconds, Elephants raising their young over a long period of time, following a very long gestation period, R and K strategists, and last but not least, human beings themselves. In every case the organism has aptly adjusted to fit their environment through evolution and time, and I feel that our society has disconnected us from this simple biological equation, an equation we can never outrun.

The problem with your logic is, there is no one over arching society to change things. It is current human nature to grow and expand, and so if there is a new direction to grow and expand into, then we're gong to move that way.

It's just easier to move to a new house, than to try and fix up the current one.

PiEdude wrote:The problem with your logic is, there is no one over arching society to change things. It is current human nature to grow and expand, and so if there is a new direction to grow and expand into, then we're gong to move that way.

It's just easier to move to a new house, than to try and fix up the current one.

Well, yeah, this would be true if our society was completely inflexible and unable to change to apply to more modern issues? This is like saying: "Oh, well all our cars run on gasoline, right? we should continue drilling for oil for the next 2000 years." because your reasoning operates under the conditions that our society is less malleable and alterable then our deeply rooted nature is, and that instead of like, I don't know, taking every possible step to prevent overpopulation, from like, birth control to denying government donations to families that raise way to many children, it would be a better alternative to build a massive fleet of space transports to ferry millions upon millions of people to alien worlds?

So should we not prepare for an inevitable asteroid impact in the future because it is not an issue now? Or that no one is arching society for change?

Additionally, my logic is not dependent on whether or not people are over arching society to change things, (even though our society is an amorphous blob of continuous change), so by saying that it flawed because people have not realized overpopulation as a serious problem now when it is not really a problem at all is not really good reasoning on your part. Because will overpopulation become an issue? well yeah, and it already is in several countries, and their efforts to control it are illogical and do not address the underlaying sociological problems.




See, the thing is, shipping hundreds of thousands of people off to a potentially hostile alien with tall blue aliens is:

1. Not a viable means of population control, AT ALL.

2. Not something we should be basing the dynamics of our entire society/economy/government around. 'Oh, lets not worry about the crippling overpopulation of the word now guys, our scientists will probably figure something out in no time that should fix everything!"

I generally find it pretentious and dirty for our governing bodies to doom us all by putting us into crippling debt, overpopulating us, and generally doing whatever they can to screw us over by the time their terms end.

What if we become like the Xel'naga?
That would be awesome!

Until our own creations turn on us and practically wipe us out. Then it would stop being awesome.

Amazing technology... with amazing results. As cool as this is, it could also end up producing biological weaposn that dwarf anything we've seen so far. Sure, we're decades away from crating a T-virus, but simple things like Exon's carbon-to-gas idea could produce drastic consequenses. Caution is necessary.

this is beautiful news

( also a big fuck you to religion pretty much... i hope people dont riot D: )

Ringleader wrote:

taking every possible step to prevent overpopulation, from like, birth control to denying government donations to families that raise way to many children, it would be a better alternative to build a massive fleet of space transports to ferry millions upon millions of people to alien worlds?

Yes, it would be a better idea to ferry millions of people to alien worlds. How the hell are we supposed to colonize otherwise?

The Pariah wrote:this is beautiful news

( also a big fuck you to religion pretty much... i hope people dont riot D: )

How?

Maybe to extremists, yes, but if anything, it proves that life can be created, and didn't necessarily have to be a random event.

its playing god as the bible says he is the taker and giver of life

The Pariah wrote:its playing god as the bible says he is the taker and giver of life

You're using the Bible as your only source, and looking no deeper into it than the words on the page.

Just as a Christian extremist would do.