Experimental Homo Sapiens

[Mircoslavux]

hi all of you,
in this thread; you can post your opinions regarding scientific experiments on humas, including mutations, embryos, cloning and so on.

One interesting news, but I'm not sure, if trully (you know British Sun).
I have read in 20 min today (source Sun), that Stalin's scientist tried to make super- army with mutations on humans. They crossed women african rase with ape males and tried to cross gorillas female with man (human cum) however, the realisation of this crazy idea was not successful and the scientists ended in Gulag in Sibirien (because Stallin was not satisfied with them). The Laboratories for these purposes were found in Russia this year.
I think the Scientist schould have had better backgroung in genetic to know that such crossing is not possible. :lol:

And small reminder - this is my 700.th post :cheers:

[Angryminer]

I might throw in an ethical thought I came up with a while ago:
The current scientific method is "Someone has a problem, we go find the chemical equivalent of the problem (virii, genetical mutation, whatever), and change this". This works ethically correct for headaches, cancer and various more deseases. But it also works for character traits like sorrow (when we want to medicate it away we call it depression). We can even medically force attention upon the human. Which is then called the cure to the attention deficit syndrome.
You will propably say "But these are illnesses like all others too!". That is right. There is a chemical equivalent of these illnesses and we can put a stop to it. But there are also chemical interpretations of happyness, love, hunger, fury - as complex they may be - and at some point we will be able to put a stop to it. Now, just because we find something a hassle, like excessive fury, or sorrow (depression) or lack of attention (ADS), is it right to put a stop to it? If it is right to medically end sorrow, it is also right to put a stop to feelings like fury. It'd be equally right to put a stop to any feeling we may find to be a hassle to us.
I can talk equally about physical restrictions, like "I'm not able to run 100m in 10 seconds" and come up with the same result: If medication of asthma is right, medication of the not-able-to-run-100m-in-10-seconds-syndrome is also right.

The sollution? Ethical restriction, you'd say.
But where do we start with our red pen? You will notice that whenever you start somewhere between "no medication" and "medicate everything" you will doom the people just beyond that line to a life of sorrow. In my opinion it is not possible to draw such a line in a currect and ethically right way. So we will be forced to put the red pen away and allow everything.
When you continue this thread of thoughts you will soon end up at the same spot as the major anti-utopian novels you can read. Sad, but logical.

Angryminer

[Mircoslavux]

you are right ,

you know, where are we going?

To CLIMAX....according the laws of nature,

[Mircoslavux]

you know, the "mamon" (money) became to be a religion in our times and then the ethic disputes are overcame.

I know that the scientist community has the right to say NO, but the money-ventures will find somebody else adn corrupt the conscience of other scientist,

so it is only question of the time, wenn will be cloning and embryo using official.

It will be easy: rich parent will came to "cloning studio" and say I want to set up our child. But ??? Maybe it will be possible to set up physical paramaters very early but not psychical.....that is complicated

The people forget they we are only co-creator and not creator, the creation role belongs to "somebody" else not to us....