If we could make man/animal hybrids...

Hepheastus420

Hepheastus420

Well-Known Member
Chief Walkin Eagle said:
Those cavemen mapped the movements of the stars Sirius A and B before anyone else (I think they took part in such rituals lol). And DMT is still a mystery, it is a trip but not just a trip. Many people and scientists consider the possibility that its a connection to "god".
Click to expand...
Which scientists?
 
Chief Walkin Eagle

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
Hepheastus420 said:
Which scientists?
Click to expand...
Look it up man, put that newly program'd materialistic brain to work! I think the first scientific observer (cant remember his name) of DMT stopped his experiments because he was getting too freaked out when two people were sharing the same trip and talking to the same angelic being at the same time.
 
Hepheastus420

Hepheastus420

Well-Known Member
Chief Walkin Eagle said:
Look it up man, put that newly program'd materialistic brain to work! I think the first scientific observer (cant remember his name) of DMT stopped his experiments because he was getting too freaked out when two people were sharing the same trip and talking to the same angelic being at the same time.
Click to expand...
Oh shit, I was programmed? Was I programmed by your bs friend?
LOL.. Tell me, how have I become more materialistic than before?
Since you can't provide me with a simple link, can you tell me what or who I should search for?
 
st0wandgrow

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
...do you think it would be morally acceptable? (this is just an example that leads onto the greater question of..)

...where is the limit that you believe science should reach? Consider, hypothetically, that science has no bounds, we can make half man, half machine... mutant type people like you'd see in X-Men, androids like in IRobot, whatever you can think of, what's the limit? Why do you believe ________'s unacceptable but ________'s not?

I think, if we could defeat aging, disease, famine, any naturalistic type death that most people die of today, we should, as I think it would probably lead to more scientific achievements. Imagine a scientist working for 9,000 years straight! I think there would be massive benefit to such advances.

I think regeneration should be near the top of the list of goals. Some animals can do it, so we know it's possible. We should know how to regenerate amputated limbs by 2020.

Cloning. Fuck yes, why the fuck not? A readily available storage of exact copies of all of your own healthy organs in case something on you goes to shit! GENIUS! "TAKE MY MONEY!"

Space exploration. Inevitable.

I really don't know where I would personally draw the line. Pretty much, if it can be done, do it. I'd like to see the limit.

What's the absolute perfect human body that can be created? Wouldn't it be cool to know? Have some scientists get together and devise some system to determine which two people out of everyone on the planet have the best genes that correspond with human mortality, they sleep together and have a child, combining the best of the best, then a team of 500 people raise that 1 kid to be the absolute most intelligent, strong, healthy human the population has ever produced! That shit would be awesome!

Jetpacks?! What!? Yes!

The best. of. the. best. I see no real moral limit, I mean, unless you start creating some zombie type creatures that go against the collective benefit of mankind... That seems just counter productive...

Also weapons, perhaps... No real need unless we have some outside thread that can't be reasoned with (the Borg, Romulans, etc..).

What do you think?

Clones, abortions, teleporting, seeing through ladies undergarments?
Click to expand...
This may sound crass, but I kinda like that we haven't figured out how to substantially extend lives through science. The world is already grossly over-populated with humans, and I see no need to be adding hybrid-humans, or figuring out how to have people live 900 years.

As a species humans have proven to be selfish, gluttonous creatures. Given this fact, I think the potential detriment to the planet of having more of us around for a longer time far outweighs the positives that could come from this.

Interesting topic, though.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
The "ancients knowing about Sirius B" myth has been debunked. It was a simple case of existing cultural contamination combined with awful anthropological hygiene. cn
 
tyler.durden

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
Hepheastus420 said:
Oh shit, I was programmed? Was I programmed by your bs friend?
LOL.. Tell me, how have I become more materialistic than before?
Since you can't provide me with a simple link, can you tell me what or who I should search for?
Click to expand...
Chief doesn't have time to provide links or back up any of his bullshit (unless it's a youtube video), he is too busy glancing at other bullshit and instantly believing it if it sounds cool to him. I'd find it more interesting at this point to read why he doesn't believe every single claim that's made. It seems his criteria is to believe almost anything that's groundless, and dismiss almost anything with empirical evidence. It's not an easy process, but it is what one must do if one wants to be Chief...
 
ActionHanks

ActionHanks

Well-Known Member
Physical bodies are going to be "obsolete" pretty soon anyways. Im thinking in the next 500-1000 years people remove their brains from their bodies, and maintain contact with the physical realm through puppet robots/androids. Im thinking people will also link up their vase brains to some sort of internet like main frame where ideas are shared and compounded. You cant really die because the "master brain" is preserved somewhere in a vat, floating in stem cells or something i dont know lol. Everytime you wreck a robot body you can just build a better one.
 
tyler.durden

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
In what way do we 'need' to die?

We need oxygen to breathe, we need food & water to survive, what need is fulfilled when we die?
Click to expand...
I think the main reason people say this (even people whom I respect) is twofold; some people live ineffectively (or have a painful terminal illness or clinical depression or believe in a afterlife superior to this one) and become more unhappy with each passing year, so they are looking forward to an end to the pain. A more popular reason is because of overpopulation coupled with dwindling resources. People are always citing lack of food and fresh drinking water. But with technology we are using less and less land to grow more and more food, and with vertical hydroponic growing (check out this amazing example in Dubai http://www.menainfra.com/news/oasis-tower-dubai-vertical-farm/) we should be able to feed everyone. Filtering sea water seems pretty simple to create fresh water (http://www.raindancewatersystems.com/desalinators.html), so we're not running out of that any time soon. I recently flew to Mexico, and was amazed to the thousands of square miles of uninhabited, hilly terrain and here in Illinois there is an unbelievable amount of flat farmland and open grass land, most of what I see from the highway isn't even being used. Plus, it's possible to build another level(s) of cities up, on top of one another and floating or undersea cities. Eventually we'll have to leave this planet as the sun's going to die in a few billions years anyway, but it seems to me that the aforementioned technologies (perhaps coupled with limits on bearing children) should decrease the consequences of over population. I'm sure I am ignorant and missing some factors in my estimations, but I just felt like tossing this out there to chew on...
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
tyler.durden said:
I think the main reason people say this (even people whom I respect) is twofold; some people live ineffectively (or have a painful terminal illness or clinical depression or believe in a afterlife superior to this one) and become more unhappy with each passing year, so they are looking forward to an end to the pain. A more popular reason is because of overpopulation coupled with dwindling resources. People are always citing lack of food and fresh drinking water. But with technology we are using less and less land to grow more and more food, and with vertical hydroponic growing (check out this amazing example in Dubai http://www.menainfra.com/news/oasis-tower-dubai-vertical-farm/) we should be able to feed everyone. Filtering sea water seems pretty simple to create fresh water (http://www.raindancewatersystems.com/desalinators.html), so we're not running out of that any time soon. I recently flew to Mexico, and was amazed to the thousands of square miles of uninhabited, hilly terrain and here in Illinois there is an unbelievable amount of flat farmland and open grass land, most of what I see from the highway isn't even being used. Plus, it's possible to build another level(s) of cities up, on top of one another and floating or undersea cities. Eventually we'll have to leave this planet as the sun's going to die in a few billions years anyway, but it seems to me that the aforementioned technologies (perhaps coupled with limits on bearing children) should decrease the consequences of over population. I'm sure I am ignorant and missing some factors in my estimations, but I just felt like tossing this out there to chew on...
Click to expand...
I'm afraid that alarm is set a little sooner, Tyler. The sun has been slowly getting more luminous over the past few billion, and the trend will continue as the natural consequence of a star's slow ripening during its Main Sequence (hydrogen-burning) tenure. Currently we're at a biologically friendly temp/climate point with an amazingly low amount of CO2 in our air. So the physicochemical "buffering" ability of our climate, the phenomenon that informs the Gaia concept, is at or very near the end of its range. Our natural atmosphere had scrubbed itself almost clean of greenhouse gases. We have maybe a few hundred million years before the climate runs away toward hot and dry, boils the oceans and streams the moisture into space as a colossal cometary tail.

Imo our future will not be planetary but as dwellers in deep space. The planetary surface will have been our cradle but not our adult territory. That will be the nested halos (asteroid, Kuiper, Oort) surrounding each star. For all I know, we might discover "no vacancy" there already, by advanced lifeforms/civilizations (or whatever follows civilization) already there and giggling "sssh!" while watching our little ant farm of a planet.
Should we luck into virgin territory, one of the first needs of our capacity to change our physiques will be to adapt to microgravity and perhaps some of the harsher conditions space brings with it. cn
 
tyler.durden

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
I'm afraid that alarm is set a little sooner, Tyler. The sun has been slowly getting more luminous over the past few billion, and the trend will continue as the natural consequence of a star's slow ripening during its Main Sequence (hydrogen-burning) tenure. Currently we're at a biologically friendly temp/climate point with an amazingly low amount of CO2 in our air. So the physicochemical "buffering" ability of our climate, the phenomenon that informs the Gaia concept, is at or very near the end of its range. Our natural atmosphere had scrubbed itself almost clean of greenhouse gases. We have maybe a few hundred million years before the climate runs away toward hot and dry, boils the oceans and streams the moisture into space as a colossal cometary tail.

Imo our future will not be planetary but as dwellers in deep space. The planetary surface will have been our cradle but not our adult territory. That will be the nested halos (asteroid, Kuiper, Oort) surrounding each star. For all I know, we might discover "no vacancy" there already, by advanced lifeforms/civilizations (or whatever follows civilization) already there and giggling "sssh!" while watching our little ant farm of a planet.
Should we luck into virgin territory, one of the first needs of our capacity to change our physiques will be to adapt to microgravity and perhaps some of the harsher conditions space brings with it. cn
Click to expand...
Thanks, Neer. I knew I'd be missing a few things. Now that we're conscious with science & advanced technology, I'm confident that even a few million years here will be sufficient to get ready for us to leave this solar system. I like to speculate that there are civilizations out there who are advanced enough to make their own (perhaps synthetic) planets with lovely atmospheres and conditions to harbor life, perfectly positioned within their respective Goldilock's zones around a suitable star (which is perhaps also made by these creatures). I hope that we become one of them...
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
tyler.durden said:
Thanks, Neer. I knew I'd be missing a few things. Now that we're conscious with science & advanced technology, I'm confident that even a few million years here will be sufficient to get ready for us to leave this solar system. I like to speculate that there are civilizations out there who are advanced enough to make their own (perhaps synthetic) planets with lovely atmospheres and conditions to harbor life, perfectly positioned within their respective Goldilock's zones around a suitable star (which is perhaps also made by these creatures). I hope that we become one of them...
Click to expand...
Honestly, I'd expect advanced habitats to be
1) not planetlike, but adapted to a more freewheeling low-g lifestyle,
2) not in a Goldilocks zone but powered internally, by fusion at least or more exotic, energy-dense technology, and
3) very very well-hidden. I would not expect aliens to be necessarily benign.

And yes; I hope we outlive our planetbound infancy. Making orbit wasn't even our first toddle. it was our first successful headlift or rollover. Parents recognize that as the much earlier developmental milestone. cn
 
tyler.durden

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Honestly, I'd expect advanced habitats to be
1) not planetlike, but adapted to a more freewheeling low-g lifestyle,
2) not in a Goldilocks zone but powered internally, by fusion at least or more exotic, energy-dense technology, and
3) very very well-hidden. I would not expect aliens to be necessarily benign.

And yes; I hope we outlive our planetbound infancy. Making orbit wasn't even our first toddle. it was our first successful headlift or rollover. Parents recognize that as the much earlier developmental milestone. cn
Click to expand...
Wow. That's why I love this forum, I never even thought about planets powered internally or low gravity. I read some new philosophy in my 20s that suggested alien life with advanced technology that we may meet would necessarily be benign, if they weren't they wouldn't have made it through their nuclear decision thresholds (the point at which a civilization is able to produce enough energy to destroy itself, but chooses to move forward and advance past this step into the future). Sounds good, but I'm not so sure ;) It's nice to see others that give these things some thought...
 
drive

drive

Active Member
What about the sci fi stand by of uploading our persons into a computer data base. then find a new place and download ourselves into indeginous species
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top