Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Oh nos... Humans fixing god's mistakes... Where will it end?

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    RobertKK
    Registered Users Posts: 33,741 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    I listened to a TED speech a few years ago. The belief is we aren’t far off from living as old as Methuselah.


  • Options
    #63
    s15r330
    Closed Accounts Posts: 944 ✭✭✭s15r330


    RobertKK wrote: »
    I listened to a TED speech a few years ago. The belief is we aren’t far off from living as old as Methuselah.

    Think I saw that, talk given by a Jesus looking lad?


  • Options
    #64
    RobertKK
    Registered Users Posts: 33,741 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    s15r330 wrote: »
    Think I saw that, talk given by a Jesus looking lad?

    Well I heard it on the radio, so God knows whether he looked likes his son.


  • Options
    #65
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    MrPudding wrote: »
    This could be a massively important step in the treatment of all kinds of diseases. Of course, it could all go a bit 28 Days Later...

    Thoughts?

    MrP

    1) How do epigenetics and gene interaction networks factor into gene editing tech?
    2) Editing an already developed phenotype sounds problematic. As I understand it, alleles express themselves in a context i.e. organismal development. Surely the tech will have to be very targeted.


  • Options
    #66
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    Very tricky situation. Everyone living forever and continuing to reproduce will not work..and that will be obvious very quickly..
    But theres also no argument to force people to let themselves die if theres technology to allow you to live on


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    wakka12 wrote: »
    Very tricky situation. Everyone living forever and continuing to reproduce will not work..and that will be obvious very quickly..
    But theres also no argument to force people to let themselves die if theres technology to allow you to live on

    if-you-jump-the-gun-and-it-jumps-you-back-8499437.png


  • Options
    #68
    c_man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,436 ✭✭✭c_man


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Self referential much? Or have you a point to make any time soon?

    Sure. That slipping in accusations that a poster suffers from autism or schizophrenia is pretty low.


  • Options
    #69
    valoren
    Registered Users Posts: 5,463 ✭✭✭valoren


    The best thing about extending life expectancy will be for interstellar travel.
    Where generations will have lived and died without stepping on land.


  • Options
    #70
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    c_man wrote: »
    Sure. That slipping in accusations that a poster suffers from autism or schizophrenia is pretty low.

    Where did he do that? And if he did maybe the suffering poster would thank him, identifying a debilitating condition, he never considered before.

    I accuse you... ...of having a cold.


  • Options
    #71
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    valoren wrote: »
    The best thing about extending life expectancy will be for interstellar travel.
    Where generations will have been born and died without stepping on land.

    Wtff? How are people getting from gene editing to radical life extension? Calm down!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    c_man wrote: »
    Sure. That slipping in accusations that a poster suffers from autism or schizophrenia is pretty low.

    I am not sure the word accusation applies. Rather a valid point for genuine consideration. So it seems the source of the problem in my post actually lies with YOUR reading of it. Which is somewhat what I expected from your first non-reply to it.

    Bees do get in bonnets.


Advertisement