GMOs

[Saint Frankenstein]

Well, I'm a Christian and a transhumanist (yes, we exist). I support genetic modification and artificial technologies to enhance human well-being. I hate Monsanto, though. They're like the capitalist devil when it comes to food. They also brought us such lovely things as Agent Orange. (I have a big distrust of chemical corporations in the first place do to all the environmental poisoning they've caused and things like the Bhopal chemical leak.) They only modify seeds so it locks the farmers into using their specific brands of pesticides, force them into contracts with crazy restrictions and the horrible effect all this has on natural crops.

 

[Simurgh]

That wouldn't happen to have been a post-orgasmic sigh, would it? I mean, are Badran and I the only one's yanking to the OP?

Nope. :beach:

damn, how disappointing. there goes my entertainment for the day.
at least things are cheesy in revoltistan

 

[The Neo Nerd]

I don't think he's coming back.

Which shouldn't shock anyone.

 

[Ouroboros]

No, I think he's saying they're all heretics... or maybe lunatics...

And condemned to Hell for tinkering with God's toys. DNA is sacred and holy. Can't touch this!

 

[Ouroboros]

Well, I'm a Christian and a transhumanist (yes, we exist). I support genetic modification and artificial technologies to enhance human well-being. I hate Monsanto, though. They're like the capitalist devil when it comes to food. They also brought us such lovely things as Agent Orange. (I have a big distrust of chemical corporations in the first place do to all the environmental poisoning they've caused and things like the Bhopal chemical leak.) They only modify seeds so it locks the farmers into using their specific brands of pesticides, force them into contracts with crazy restrictions and the horrible effect all this has on natural crops.

I agree with you.

Personally, genetic engineering is a two-edged sword. There are good things with it, but it can be extremely dangerous too.

It's kind'a funny that the pest resistant crops Monsanto engineered now is starting to be threatened by new mutated species of bugs, only 10-15 years after the making. I saw some article that evolution is in full speed right now. There's no slowing down on new and improved pests that we can't defend ourselves from.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I agree with you.

Personally, genetic engineering is a two-edged sword. There are good things with it, but it can be extremely dangerous too.

Most definitely. We must be extremely careful; consider the ethical ramifications of it and the possibilities - both good and bad. But humans are not known to exercise caution with new scientific discoveries.

It's kind'a funny that the pest resistant crops Monsanto engineered now is starting to be threatened by new mutated species of bugs, only 10-15 years after the making. I saw some article that evolution is in full speed right now. There's no slowing down on new and improved pests that we can't defend ourselves from.

Lol. Of course. Nature isn't stupid. It's the same thing with the flu virus. Pests and viruses want to survive just as much as we do.

 

[Parsimony]

It would have been nice if OP would have given an argument for why genetic engineering is blasphemy.

Also, what does it have to do with evolution vs. creationism?

 

[Simurgh]

It would have been nice if OP would have given an argument for why genetic engineering is blasphemy.

Also, what does it have to do with evolution vs. creationism?

I asked that too, and i am still waiting for an answer. maybe you have better luck.

he just might not want to answer a mere female....being a creationist and all that it would be understandable. he's probably still afraid of what an eve could do to him...

 

[KMGC]

I asked that too, and i am still waiting for an answer. maybe you have better luck.

he just might not want to answer a mere female....being a creationist and all that it would be understandable. he's probably still afraid of what an eve could do to him...

I slept in today and was out all day, otherwise I'd have answered. Never seen such ridiculous misuse of a thread. You apparently choose to humiliate yourselves by abusing what should be typical policies in a thread. I have chosen not to report that for now.

This belongs in evolutionism vs. creationism because in my opinion atheists are the majority voice behind GMOs. I am an ex-atheist myself, but after observing an interview with a scientist stating that animals who had GMOs tested on them could not have children by the third generation you'd think people would come to their senses on this matter. There's little else to say. Gene therapy has never produced solid results, from cloning to GMOs - it's dangerous science and it belongs beside atrocities like the Holocaust in history. I'm sure one day it will find it's place there.

 

[freethinker44]

it's dangerous science and it belongs beside atrocities like the Holocaust in history.

The people who abuse the knowledge gained from science are dangerous, not the science itself.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

This belongs in evolutionism vs. creationism because in my opinion atheists are the majority voice behind GMOs.

Any evidence to support that opinion, or is it just a conclusion you jumped to for no particular reason?

I am an ex-atheist myself, but after observing an interview with a scientist stating that animals who had GMOs tested on them could not have children by the third generation you'd think people would come to their senses on this matter.

Firstly, where is this interview?

Secondly, do you know that the vast majority of what we eat is genetically modified? All the vegetables that we eat have been artificially selected for flavour, texture and nutritional value. Please explain to me what is so evil about this fact.

There's little else to say. Gene therapy has never produced solid results, from cloning to GMOs - it's dangerous science and it belongs beside atrocities like the Holocaust in history. I'm sure one day it will find it's place there.

This is a ridiculous thing to say. Genetic modification isn't just "gene therapy" - it is a broad term which encompasses artificial selection and selective breeding, and it is thanks to advances made in these fields that we can actually successfully feed the vast majority of people on the planet. To equate advances in genetic science with the holocaust is laughably absurd and I sincerely hope that you are being cunningly ironic by comparing a practice which could save (and most likely already has saved) billions of lives to the selective culling of millions of innocent men, women and children. Your grasp on reality is extremely suspect.

 

[KMGC]

The people who abuse the knowledge gained from science are dangerous, not the science itself.

I stand corrected.

 

[KMGC]

Any evidence to support that opinion, or is it just a conclusion you jumped to for no particular reason?


Firstly, where is this interview?

Secondly, do you know that the vast majority of what we eat is genetically modified? All the vegetables that we eat have been artificially selected for flavour, texture and nutritional value. Please explain to me what is so evil about this fact.


This is a ridiculous thing to say. Genetic modification isn't just "gene therapy" - it is a broad term which encompasses artificial selection and selective breeding, and it is thanks to advances made in these fields that we can actually successfully feed the vast majority of people on the planet. To equate advances in genetic science with the holocaust is laughably absurd and I sincerely hope that you are being cunningly ironic by comparing a practice which could save (and most likely already has saved) billions of lives to the selective culling of millions of innocent men, women and children. Your grasp on reality is extremely suspect.

You say that now, before the third generation has happened. That is what I was stating should be graspable. If in three generations due to the pesticides in our own bodies we cannot reproduce how will we continue to survive, buddy? Call that laughable? I'm talking about inevitable extinction vs. some going hungry. And you're pretty much guaranteed that the poor people they're feeding that wheat to don't know they're eating something that will prevent their children's children's children reproduce.

And here's your answer for requests of an article. http://www.bing.com/search?q=gmo+animal+infertility&FORM=AWFB

 

[Enai de a lukal]

Whoa, crackpot alert. Atheism and GMO's? I'd imagine UFO's fit in here somewhere as well? Bigfoot? Loch Ness monster?

 

[Parsimony]

This belongs in evolutionism vs. creationism because in my opinion atheists are the majority voice behind GMOs.

Atheism is not equal to evolution, so your claim that this is somehow relevant to evolution vs. creationism still does not add up.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Is it just me or are atheists believing that as all was once one molecule that altered itself "naturally" there is no reason not to combine the DNA of other molecules.

 

[KMGC]

Atheism is not equal to evolution, so your claim that this is somehow relevant to evolution vs. creationism still does not add up.

But evolution is generally only believed in by atheists, so it still does.

 

[Sunstone]

But evolution is generally only believed in by atheists, so it still does.

You're kind of "evidence challenged" aren't you?

 

[Parsimony]

But evolution is generally only believed in by atheists, so it still does.

No, as there are plenty of Christians and other theists who do accept evolution (Saint Frankenstein and myself being among them). Deists would certainly have no dogmatic problem with evolution.

You should probably familiarize yourself with theistic evolution.

 

[Ouroboros]

But evolution is generally only believed in by atheists, so it still does.

Many, or most pantheists, deists, and theists believe in evolution. And there are Christians, Jews, and even Muslims who believe in evolution (actually, not just believe, but being convinced based on the evidence they've seen).

Here's the problem:

Every cat is a four legged animal.

Does that mean that every four legged animal is a cat?

No!

Even if every atheist is an evolutionist, it does *not* mean that every evolutionist is an atheist.

Your logic is flawed.

Or put it this way, KMGC is a poster on RF, therefore every poster on RF is KMGC?