The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

2 Decades ago a Sheep by the name of Dolly was the first mammal to be cloned successfully to the public. The most common objection was that such activity is "Playing God".

My opinion, there is no line being crossed. We are evolving as a race and the most we create, the far we will go. The creation of food is one of the most advance creation, due to the fact, that now, we can create, from Vegetables to meat. So, I see hope for the famine an others countries. Lets end starvation and keep creating corn, meat and so on.

Because we now live in an age of "no consequence...", I can state as a matter of fact, that there is no real "Playing God: for society these days on account that society has been manipulated into believing that science is a valued nature ad principle there by being a clause. Research in certain areas of science can enable anything to happen on a molecular scale. Involving anything from evolution and state of being to cures, and resolves from technological advancements.

We don't play GOD. We endeavor from that natural correspondence with what energies God gives us and the grace from that charity. We learn to borrow and accept with great humility.... (end ramble).

It is indeed "playing god" but since there is no god, then no one is really crossing him.
The death penalty is more hypocrisy than actually playing god but cloning and other artificial means of creating life, organic or otherwise, speaks for itself.

Humans fancy themselves gods when they in fact one of the weakest prey species on earth.

I have no issue with euthanasia, if someone wants to have control over their own life and death, then power to them.

Death Penalty I find very backwards....its illegal to kill and so they punish by...killing? Human life matters not but society is off put-tingly really odd and stupid. The law seems to be "do as I say, not what I do"

Then there's "Eye for an eye makes the whole world blind"

However, most folk that want to take their own life, can't because they are so disabled, but they can sometimes communicate that to some, so that they can euthanized, thus is their will and decision on the matter of their life.

Once again this is where the law is backwards, they can put a dog out of its misery, even though dogs can't decide it, yet when a human is clearly suffering and they are making that point very clear and they choose to die, its illegal and disallowed. Only certain place allow someone to be euthanized.

If one can can relate suicide to self-sacrifice, then technically the church shouldn't frown on suicide since didn't Jesus willingly die for everyone "sin". I am have no interest in the bible or church lore, so I may be wrong.

but back to the original selections.

Cloning is the act of creating life artificially, no matter how alive or natural it is organically, its origins are unnatural so it is "playing god" but medically there could be usefulness in it.
I don't normally tolerate it when humans step beyond their station, especially when their inventions endanger the world but this...this could benefit nature.

A lot of animals have gone extinct or are going extinct as a result of human interference. Cloning could possibly undo such negative effects by restoring their population...of course, to avoid incest and inbreeding, dna needs to be frequently altered. I dislike the idea of human cloning since population is currently unbearable as it is but as I said, it has medical potential, such as growing new limbs and organs for soldiers.

Dinosaurs had their end naturally, I was talking about ones caused by human interference...but.say they did resurrect dinosaurs, what could possibly go wrong? hell, even make a theme park! that is completely original and has never been done before even in fiction....

"Even if animals have become extinct by the actions of humans, wouldn't that still be natural since humans are natural?"

Not necessarily, humans may be natural they actions aren't, destroying forests for buildings etc I do see where you are coming from though.

"What extinct animal would you see make a come back?"

All that died as a result of human interference.

"Ok ... this is a no-no topic, but what about abortion? If we (we being me) that any matter involving life and death is playing God, wouldn't that act being playing God? I've never actually thought about it like that."

Nothing wrong with abortion, less humans the better.

"Or what about plastic surgery that involves changing the way God made us?
I guess, you could say just about anything we do is playing God."

Correct, more or less everything unnatural anyway.

Killing is not really playing god under most circumstances.

"What you said about abortion is vile. You really should be ashamed of yourself. Do you not have any family that you love??? How can you be so full of hate? I really wish your elusive 1% would make an appearance. I'd love to have a good discussion, anywhere, somewhere. I'm bored reading about how you hate humans. I want to be enlightened, not disgusted."

Oh go bark up a tree, lol spare me your whinging because I have no use for it, it bores me and has no place in a serious discussion.
Love? family? Don't know love, don't have family, I would not have any use for them if I did.

Oh the 1% are here. I have already found some who may have the potential. I just have to get in their head. You may have met some already.
I am not obliged to give you a reason why I hate humanity, and if so bored you are, then stop asking me questions about it because questioning is curiosity. You are not forced to communicate with me, but you just can't help yourself. Stop derailing topics. I don't give my views for you or anyone to agree with them, they are here as my perspective on the subject which we are all entitled to, I don't get outraged at yours, so try and be respectful back lol.



There is absolutely nothing wrong with abortions. I can understand why some may disagree but then they are not stuck with an unwanted parasite. Of course, the most simplest answer would be to not have unprotected sex in the first place but desire overrules common sense almost all the damn time. What a bunch of rabbits.

its a woman's right and quite frankly it can be a mercy for both mother and child. If a woman is disallowed abortion, that woman may be full of resentment and bitterness, which will be aimed at the unwanted child. The child will then either be abused or sent to a foster home, growing up wanting to know why it wasn't wanted. So dearie, abortion is actually a much more kinder option, the other is to execute it after its born but that would be illegal in today's society.

It helps the population a little as well, there are too many folks around, china had the right idea when things got bad, they had a one child only policy. I hear they even forcibly sterilized a woman because she had a second child.

If its as flamebait as politics and religion then agreed Lazarus, it should be refrained. I however, was merely replying to whether it was playing god or not. Which I don't think it is, some animals leave the runts to die, abortion just takes that further.

Personally, I think all those items are "Playing G".

I only find a moral issue with these acts of creating or taking life directly though.

I mean, anyone who ever wished they were born to different parents or not born at all should be able to relate and that is the natural version of creating life. For the record, my mother was awesome, just an example.

The production of nuclear arms is a problem when these arms are applied. Brace Yourselves....Nuclear winter is coming?

The death penalty is a gross example of state-side Hippocracy. I wonder how many truly innocent men have been executed.

Euthanasia, I'm ok with. One should have the right to end their own life. Not my style personally, but that doesn't mean someone else should have to suffer just because some suit thinks it is wrong.

Agreed Dj, death penalty is amusingly hypocritical, mixed messages at its best.

Euthanasia is fine, but obviously it has to be the patient's choice, otherwise you have yourself an angel of death, who takes matters into their own hands.

Curious though, you don't hear that many folks complain about the fact that dogs don't really consent to being put down, no matter how visible their pain is.

I don't like to get into too much "What If" scenarios, but I guess the overall stance for me is that someone should not be able to dictate when it is "time" for someone else. That is the moral problem I have, nuclear weapons, Euthanasia, old school 187, you name it. I think it's wrong.

The terminally ill cancer patient should have the choice and the individual alone. Not the state, not a doctor, certainly not an intern, and I don't even think a spouse should have that right assuming the patient can still speak or communicate.

I only gave a pass for an individuals decision with regard to taking their own life.

BTW I hope that woman's family sued the holy hell out of that place.

And I really hope the new VR has an edit button :)

Still a mixed message, you can't say killing is illegal and then say it is simply because there is a signed paper that says so.

The law is basically do as I say, not as I do which is pathetic. Hypocritical is an understatement for the death penalty and the law, You want to kill a killer? absolutely fine but don't say its illegal in one way, and legal in another. killing is killing, simple as. To clarify, "you" as in humanity in general, not you you.

Rape a rapist? fine but same as above. Even a monster like me can take umbrage at hypocrisy and call them out on it.

Eating a cannibal would be funny though.

There is not much nice about serving a life sentence. Spend just an hour in the box and you might feel different. Spend another hour in gen pop, and you'll probably wish you were back in the box.

All this to reiterate the point made here, the system is flawed. Severely.

"Innocent defendants are far more likely to have their sentenced changed to life in prison than to be executed. Still, with an error rate of 4 percent, the researchers write, “it is all but certain that several of the 1,320 defendants executed since 1977 were innocent.”

52.8 Innocent men executed.

"We will never know for sure, but the few studies that have been done estimate that between 2.3% and 5% of all prisoners in the U.S. are innocent (for context, if just 1% of all prisoners are innocent, that would mean that more than 20,000 innocent people are in prison)."

120k Innocents incarcerated.

I'm not going to two wrongs don't make a right you to death. I completely understand the practical effects of an eye for an eye system. My beef, is with the existing system.

Take for example, the O.J. Simpson trial.
There was all this outrage about why minorities cheered for a murderer getting off. I can tell you right now, I cheered. Not because I thought a murder didn't get justice. Honestly, that wasn't on my radar at all. What I saw for the first time on national TV, was a black man beating the system because he had fame and money. The cops botched the procedures because they were too busy star gazing, and then he had the money to buy a defense that could win.
If it don't fit acquit, right?

Since the trial he has proven himself to be a very moronic individual who simply can't stay out of his own way. None of that is important.
Don't know if he really did it or not, don't care.

What was important to me, was suddenly, the system was broken. Suddenly, if even for a brief moment, America had to swallow the reality that money, buys verdicts out here. If you can't afford to lawyer up, you'll likely get the full shaft lady justice is serving. But if you can throw lady justice and her hit squad a few dollars, you might be able to go back home to our kids. It's crap.

And this is the same system we use to determine if someone lives or dies under the death penalty. I'm not cool with that.

The system has always been flawed because of money, this includes lawyers as well.
Prosecutors who want to climb the ladder only want to win cases regardless if the defendant is innocent or not, and even if the prosecutor knows if they are innocent, they will usually still try and win the case.
Greed and ambition is humanity's trademark and their fellow man suffer for it. Currency will always be the source of corruption.

Even in lesser cases where the defendant is guilty and only committed a minor crime or simply an accident that resulted in a death, prosecutors will nearly always push for maximum classification i.e like murder instead of manslaughter and go for maximum penalty.
Prosecutors are key figures in the death of innocents due to the death penalty.

Life imprisonment can be so much worse than death, its like how some killers keeps some of their victims alive in the basement to the point where the victims actually wish for death, just for it to be over.

Killing is all well and good, but hypocrisy just bores me and is another disgusting human trait. I'm down for eye for an eye, just don't say its illegal first.

"The system has always been flawed because of money, this includes lawyers as well." A big YES!!! Is this playing God? To me, yes it is. When a person goes to jail for the rest of his or her life because of a Judge's decision, yes that is playing God. The Judge being God in this case.

I will not get into a long drawn out discussion here, but if a person has been caught up in something and is innocent, yet is poor, and gets stuck with a public defender, and a crooked prosecutor decides he/she wants the person to go down, and has the Judge in his/her pocket, the person does not stand a chance. I have seen it happen. Pisses me off!!!!!!

If humans truly cared for justice then such "mistakes" would not happen as often since its money and power that motivates lawyers, not justice. Humans can be bought. Perhaps courts should be run by machines and A.I.

Let's play two games at once. We have now this artificially intelligent court system. And while I agree that with current machines and technology as we know it, the true route of an error is almost always some form of a human error, an A.I. system could be able to minimize false information.

The system charges a suspect who would likely be geo-located in real time. The A.I. can now use all available resources to cross reference information. Security cameras, web cams, cell phone cameras, gps locations, text messages, call logs, social media posts and locations, money transactions, lo-jack gps locations. The suspect is brought in for questioning. The A.I. could analyze brain waves with EEG technology to determine if the suspect is telling the truth. The same can be used for witnesses. Said suspect would need to have one helluva air tight alibi.

That's a version without any trans-humanist applications.

A.I. court applications is merely the tip of the super intelligent potential ice berg.

Humans are one of the weakest animals on this planet and despite their wasted intelligence that should be a gift enough, they want to be powerful in every way, especially physically.

This is what those who work on advance prosthesis fear, that some moron desperate for a hand with crushing strength will actually amputate themselves just to get an "upgrade", this would indeed being playing god as humans would then be taking it upon themselves to forcibly evolve...and in an unnatural manner too.

I strongly believe that no one should be allowed to be "upgraded" at all, especially if they cut off their own limbs, they should then suffer because of their arrogance. Prosthetic limbs should only be available to those who deserve it such as soldiers.

A:I in courts would be better since Lawyers are self serving career obsessed parasites but A:I is not immune to faults either, glitches could happen and they could be interfered with by someone.

I'm going to go out on a limb, and highly doubt that one of those "wasted intelligence" individuals would then out hack a super intelligent A.I.

On the other hand, I would not deny the potential element of errors and "glitches". +/- manifestation through all things that matter. And then in that same breathe I would say that the potential for a fully self-aware intelligent A.I. is most likely going to be able to correct these same glitches faster than a human being could read an error message.

From what I understand of the accelerated particle quantum science, the man made black holes are super teeny tiny and are no where close to the size required to start sucking mass into the very micro event horizon. As far as it has been explained there is no realistic shot of the Earth being sucked into a small hole (about 22 micrograms).

They also don't last very long and evaporate almost instantly.

I do. However, I don't see anything morally unjust about it though.

Eve bit into the apple of knowledge. And then Jesus is crucified for the sins of ALL man.

The atom was split. The same science used to destroy entire cities, also powers entire cities.

The quest for knowledge itself is not a bad thing. Taking lives, is the part that isn't cool.

It is the respect for others, lives specifically, and the positive application of knowledge that matters most.

"It is the respect for others, lives specifically, and the positive application of knowledge that matters most."

Unfortunately when it comes to humans, some of their knowledge is gained by violating and harming other lives, with no respect or qualms to their wellbeing.

Optimism that is, what makes you think that what you know wasn't gained via unethical means at some point? Yes, some knowledge has been gained fairly and was one of the reasons why I was impressed with you apes but a lot of your ambitious sciences requires testing....which is not always unethical.
But yes, sometimes it is gained fairly and I can respect that. especially if it can counteract the damage done to the world.

What is here referred to as "Playing God". Is to atheist, apatheist, and others that have gotten over the personification syndrome a question of are these activities disrupting Universal Law? The logical answer is "No not at all." It is simply the next level of evolution. Evolution is not about things always being flawless. It takes many stages that include undesired results, then those flaws are minimized, or eliminated. With science we can adapt , we are making a frontier and exploring it. Society has some rigid objects against things that defy their ingrained sensibilities. However how can they fully object to advancements when eventually those advancements that came from "tinkering" with Universal Law promise to benefit them, and more importantly the human race in the not to distant furniture. Was abolishing Small Pox with vaccinations "wrong", will the eventual treatment, then cure for cancer be wrong, will it upset the natural order? Perhaps at first we may note a strain to the population from far fewer people dying. So anyone could object to the cure of cancer being made readily available. It comes down to the particulars of those o objecting, with stem cell protesters the evidence shows that it is ignorance of biology that stirs them to object , that and their religious indoctrination . These groups, and other hacks are all driven by ignorance. The very people that are absolutist, and out to impose irrational ultimatums on society as a whole. Which is them taking a conscious effort to disrupt the natural order. While it implies order, nature, and the universe is also chaotic . Fluid really. So mankind has come to out precept our threshold. To project our race (our gene, The Selfish Gene) across the cosmos will take a progressive approach. What is AI today will likely be introduced to semi organic material, an Artificial sentient being . Image the potential? Stellar voyages, impractical for organic humans could be plausible for Semi Autonomous Artificial beings. How long are we going to be bogged down by those that are driven to outrage because of their dogmatic beliefs from an archaic religion, or their psuedological sources. Will there likely be some undesired results along the way? Indeed it is guaranteed , but part of progress is figuring out what doesn't work. How will advance without syncing ourselves with the actual universal law/order that the uneducated accuse us of violating?

Nature is indeed chaotic, hence why I find it stupid why humanity seeks to control it all the time instead of just letting nature be as it is, I have no objections to some advancements as long as it doesn't harm or damage nature as despite the unnatural nature of technology, the ability to think and create is naturally given....its just misused.
Cancer may already have been cured for all you know. Its just not cost effective to use, pharmaceutical companies will lose a lot of money if cancer, hiv/aids etc is cured, and money means more to the hairless apes than a cure that spare their species countless deaths.

However, I do object to saving too many lives as like death, diseases existed for a reason. Curing all fatal diseases and imposing too many laws that restrict causes of death will cause this already overpopulated planet will be stripped of its resources in no time, the only way for humanity to survive without rendering plants and non-human animals extinct would be to war with each other for said resources. A war that would only be won by genocide of humans from the other countries.
Or become cannibals and eat each other since on the plus side of curing all diseases, they won't have much to fear about consuming each other. Ha! and the Wendigos shall rise!

Welcome back by the way Dabs, your presence in the forums has been sorely missed, the forums have suffered in your absence in the last few months. Dakotah and a few others have been the only ones making decent threads.

The whole concept behind the mentality of "Save The Planet" , Save The Whales, Save The Seven Toed Wooly Strew, is an egotistical presumptuous conceited mind fuck.
As if we are so Damn destructive that our mere presence is a threat to an entire planet. Yea so there is evidence of global warming, big toot , the earth by its self could contribute a many fold larger dose of "pollutants" and other environmental disrupting elements. Just one series of eruptions. What "damage" that you inflict on the planet is only significant relative to our well being, and the well being of other species , and plant life. We may not be able to reverse the effects of serious eco type disasters, Nuclear Meltdowns polluting (Fuginoma in Japan) , or significant oil spills ( BP). However put it in perspective the Earth don't give Fuck One. It's our whiny asses fretting over the pending consequences of our lax stewardship. So how about a slogan "Get Shit Right!" or "Don't Fuck our Habitat!".

Natural disasters are completely fine because it is natural and inevitable but what man does is not, nuclear damage to the planet for one thing, non human animals rendered extinct by human interference due to destroying a habitat since some species are heavily dependent on their environment to survive and cannot adapt.

I disagree about earth not noticing, especially since it depends how you take it as noticing, the changes to the world are the side effects of man's work, that is the world noticing and reacting to it.
If this world ever becomes beyond help, then it should be burned and utterly destroyed to save it from a slow decay and hopefully take mankind out before they have a chance to poison another world

We as a species will reduce or planet to a resource scarce waste land eventually , many other species will pass away as well. The Planet will abide. Perhaps eons later the taters of residue generic material will begin a variation on evolutionary development.

Perhaps, but that is no excuse really, dozens of life-forms extinguished just so man can still have their log fires and their ever expanding cities etc.

Humans will indeed strip this planet, killing and possibly rendering a few species extinct in the process and the kicker is...you really don't have to, your ancestors survived quite fine without the necessities of today, "Cave Men" were arguably stronger than you lot and capable of surviving just fine in the wild...drop one of you in the wild today without training and despite the food sources everywhere, you will starve to death, simply from not knowing how to survive in the "real" world. One man actually killed his beloved dog and ate it, despite the food sources everywhere, hilarious really. Even Dogs have lost their edge thanks to being domesticated as that dog failed to find food even when it already there.

Extinction by nature is fine, that is nature taking its course, when man does, it is for his petty selfish and artificial desires.

To clarify myself because I am beginning to sound like a tree hugger, which I am not since I don't truly care about life or death of a species in general, hell I want you all dead but as an instrument of nature, I find accidental killing out ignorance rather than need such as food to be idiotic at best and wasteful at worse, why let meat go to waste? Just that but a good predator doesn't drain their resources, otherwise they will soon starve. Humans take greedily without concern for the finite nature of things.

Humans are mostly oblivious to anything other than themselves, simply because they don't care about anything else.

This is what makes me what to skin you all, you think you're more important that the other species, that somehow their lives and habitat, as well existence on this planet is not as important as yours and is worth expending for yourselves, I think the human population is high enough and certainly does not need expanding anymore....in fact I think a good culling is in order. Perhaps nature will send out a more devastating tsunami or hurricane to clean the planet up a bit from human filth. I would like to see 1/3 of the world human population dead.

Certain technologies like the nanotech as portrayed in the movie Trancendance, could be useful, natural habitats could be restored and perhaps nuclear waste and damage could be undone as well. Of course, how real would it be? from the outside it may look like a natural habitat, microscopically it would be nanites and how would that effect the species living in it? Herbivores need to eat vegetation and if said vegetation is artificial and has none of the same properties as it once did then it is almost a failure.

No, I fully meant what I said, I view you all as inferior to me and that's that, your belief otherwise is of no consequence or significance to me. I said this before, your "moral outrage" is boring and doesn't change anything. You may as well try and cause pain to something with no nerve endings because admonishing me is pointless.
I do live in the real world dearie, I spend but a fraction of my time on here. The majority of my time is spent dealing with the real world, rather than putting up with fools thinking they can challenge me.

Fact is that this is a public forum where we can all post our personal views, no one has to agree with them, but they are entitled to have them without being antagonised. If you don't like what I say, just ignore it, you are not forced to comment on my posts, you constantly derail topics because you can't just accept differences in personal views. The really funny thing is that I am not being inflammatory, my posts are my genuine view with no intention of provocation, I have no care about another's reaction nor do I require it, either disagree or don't, it matters little to me but when you over react, its "you" who then causes drama. I also don't attack others for their "moral" views, I will merely disagree with it in a civil manner The so called bad guy is actually the good guy here since I haven't actually antagonized anyone, at least deliberately. So ignore this....if you are even capable.

Back to the point.

Nanotechnology in Transcendence allows for cellular regeneration and physical superiority, sounds nice on paper doesn't it? but in the long run, it is seriously not good. Problem with scientists is the "good intentions" part, the road to hell is paved with it.

Curing is all well and good until curing because attempts at immortality or a absurdly long life span. I mean look at what scientists and army generals have done in decades. What they could do with an infinite life span....

I read that Humans can live at most, around 125 years maximum. This should be enough since that is more than a life time, hell there are some folk who can live a very fulfilling life with only 20 or 30 years to spare.

But in the future with superior rejection-less organ transplants, cloning and ever more latest techniques and technology, Humans may live far longer than normal, with maybe 80 being the new "middle age" and with nanotechnology, it may be even worse, so I doubt the restoration of the environment would be worth increase the life span of humanity.

Death is a natural and inevitable occurrence, trying to stop it is being greedy for life, sure survival instinct plays a strong part in staying alive, and preventing death caused by others and predators is commendable and to be expected from any animal with a survival instinct, but trying to stop aging and death by such means is wrong, that is playing god to the extreme.

I suppose one good trade off for a longer life span should be sterility, that would be "fair" me thinks, well more than fair since you get to exist longer than you should. In china, they have a one child rule due to the absurd population length, humans are just not dying like they used to.
This is why I am pro war these days, it is guaranteed to cull the population even if a little, regardless of who "wins".

Not exactly thrilled at the idea of planet colonization but if a scenario occurs where ALL of humanity left the earth, perhaps its a win-win, Humans get to have a "dead" planet that they can't ruin so easily and earth becomes Human-free.

As I said before, some tech can be useful, so I don't condemn it all, I just abhor tech that can needlessly harm the world.

God complex- an unshakable belief characterized by consistently inflated feelings of personal ability, privilege, or infallibility.

The sub doctrines of preservation and providence seem to have some merit. Life and resources do seem to have the ability to replenish themselves.

I think all residents could and should be good stewards of our available resources though.

Funny you mention God, some of my droogs on here call me God-King lol
Though I don't view myself as infallible, me and death will have a party one day.

You know what Lazarus? I can accept that, if humans are no longer capable of doing harm then such an upgrade has got my vote. Its natural evolution but it will spare the earth any more grief but the problem with becoming a machine is that natural evolution is not likely to occur, future upgrades would be done like a computer rather some random effect.

@voelk

Some resources cannot be replenished unfortunately, some foods can become extinct but yeah, humanity needs to be a bit more aware of their effect on this planet.

Its not natural evolution*
See not infallible.

Speaking of food.
Farms is something I am 50-50 on as well, on one hand, its natural organic food but on another, its cheating. The creatures are penned and have no chance, its like shooting fish in a barrel.
All sorts of chemicals are used to fatten the animals, which does it and the consumer no good.

Hunting is more fair and natural in my view. Working for your meal is more rewarding.

"...the problem with becoming a machine is that natural evolution is not likely to occur, future upgrades would be done like a computer rather some random effect."

And the solution to this problem is man merging with the machine i.e transcendence as opposed to being a slave to the machine i.e The Matrix.

Strip away the Hollywood image of the machine for a moment and work with pure logic. Just like with Aliens, a super intelligent being of any kind would likely crush humanity like a boot squashing an ant hill. If that is to be how things played out, mankind would stand no chance, hence Hawkings concern of a machine willed A.I.

We've discussed this a little in the
The Neo Human Thread..

There are great minds provocatively addressing these concerns including both Hawking and Kaku.

Oh I am not condemning the machine in this case, nor comparing it to the matrix, I just mean that such a merge may render natural evolution void,and once "perfection" has been achieved if possible, stagnation will inevitably occur.

And for clarification, I believe that Aliens or the Super Intelligent machine willed A.I. would 'likely' eradicate man with ease, not because it is easy for them, or they know that they are superior, but rather because it is obvious that the first reaction of humanity would be to fight.

Even a Super Intelligent being can't stop the universe from being it's violent self.

There will always be something to do. There will always be a problem that needs to be fixed.

There will always be +/-

But not from a merged humanity...presumably, any other occurrences out there would probably be natural disasters or natural events, something that won't need intervention, again presumably.

Humanity fears what it doesn't understand, so of course humans would attack first.

Terminator had that. Skynet went self aware and humans simply tried to pull the plug rather than celebrate such an achievement and in Genisys, the humans try to stop skynet before it can be born while it is still "genisys" and a hologram of it correctly calls them out on their attempts to murder it first.

MordrakusxMortalitas, I am reading over this thread and have to point this out- stay on point and quit it with the name calling (you apes) and how you're so disappointed in people posting here. You don't need to start a personal note with a member with your equal disappointment in threads being made in the forum as of late... stay on topic. Disagree without potshots. Warning made.

You might want to get those glasses from specsavers instead of snapchat (Is it? assuming its one those weird app things and not real) then dearie because I am not the one derailing topics, I post my honest personal views on a subject, and if no one like its then tough, cry me a river because last time I checked this site was open to anyone capable of putting in a username and password, including psychopaths, not that I am one of course but those who don't or can't understand me label me as such. You don't see me having a go at others simply for their personal views now do you? So who is really the antagonist here?
To clarify, I say "you apes" as a general term for your species not a potshot, I am not calling anyone names directly as far as I recall so save your warnings for the weak, especially since A: threats have no effect on me and B, you lot have basically said the same thing about the forums yourselves I believe, how they are not the same as they used to be, how they are disappointing blah blah. I speak the truth, the forums are not the same, some posters in the recent months have been just idiotic roleplayers who you won't get anything intelligent out of. That said, there are some here like Dakotah, Laz and Cinn who are actually decent posters, shame that personal issues and over sensitivity gets in the latter's way.

What is humorous really, thanks to this being on this thread in particular is that misuse of power, even administrative is also like playing god or playing dictator really and plenty members here have much to say on admins too.
Personally I don't care about it either way, as long as the admins smartly stay out of my way because I bow down to no man or woman, no matter what power they wield, especially if its merely digital. That said I can respect it since I have been an administrator on a site before and aware of the responsibility and duty it comes with but not even I misused it so I expect others (especially if they presumably morally better) to follow suit, no one is above the rules and to clarify this, not speaking to you directly since as far as I know I haven't "seen" you misuse your position....well other than foolishly pointing your finger at the wrong villain. I am talking about admins in general on here, they have a....funny reputation here which is not entirely underserved and it doesn't help that they do not interact much with the community outside of messages and journals, I don't recall seeing an admin posting in here about the topics like us but of course, you can't administer a thread that you're personally involved in, it would be bias.
So point of this post, do try picking on those who are actually causing the disruptions in future dearie i.e those who willingly choose to disrupt a forum out of some over the top "moral" outrage instead of a polite disagreement....it is really easy to agree to disagree....I can't even believe that I am the one pointing this out. I am not the antagonist here and you know it Images, so feel free to warn others in future because I am not going to stop posting my views, I have a right to them as do any other poster

All I can do is make you a deal, a deal with the Devil so to speak. I will try and reduce my "verbal" contempt for your species in the forums (keyword there is reduce, not eliminate) and in return that you actually target those who are actively disrupting the forums no matter if their reactions is just or not because believe it or not dearie, I want these threads to stay on topic as much as any other serious poster, a good debate can only happen if a thread is on topic and I actually enjoy a little discussion with some of the more intelligent or at least enlightened ones.

Fact is I can't help my nature anymore than I could force the sun to set. Sometimes the world just has monsters in it and all you can do is stay out of their way. That is my warning.

But let us return to the programme at hand, now that we have had the weather forecast. Winter is here.

Cloning.

Cloning is a something I am mixed about because on one hand, extinct species that was not caused by nature could be somewhat restored, you would obviously have to have more than one dna type or you will just be creating the same individual over and over with no way to breed them naturally, plus if two individuals were created, female and male, incest would take hold as two members of a species cannot properly populate their species, so Noah's Ark and Adam and Eve can take that where the sun doesn't shine, never got how those fools thought such as thing would be believable but faith and superstition are strong indeed.

Since cloning doesn't actually have to be a full clone, organs and limbs could be grown and because they would presumably be the same dna of their donor, then rejection should not occur...but that can happen still. I know someone who had their ear bitten off by a dog, he then had it re-attached but it went black and fell off anyway, there are no guarantees.

Problem with organ transplants or any other transplants is balance, someone could live way too long if this particular field was highly developed, and curing is well and good but extending life merely because you want to live longer, now that is cheating.

Worse if it became possible for consciousness to be transferred as someone could arrange for their mind to be put in their younger and healthier cloned body. This could be done infinitely and thus a form of immortality, which is unacceptable....unless the clones are sterile, which would be fair since in the long run, there would eventually be a lot of sterile folks out there and the population would not really increase so much.

Nuclear Weapons.
I find these utterly overkill, the idea of them is usually deterrent against another superpower but their use means heavily collateral damage at best and a mutually assured destruction at worst, nuclear weapons is probably the stupidest way to protect oneself, its like burning a whole forest full of different lifeforms just to kill only one. I won't call it playing god since a nuke bomb's only purpose is to destroy and has no positive applications.

There is plenty of weapons that others could use to get the job done without irradiating their environment.
The wasteful thing about nukes is that as far as I know, nuclear waste cannot be rid of so easily or at all really. So man creates nukes with no intention of really using them and then they are stuck with waste that they cannot dispose of. Brilliant isn't it?....

No animal is more self-destructive.


Artificial Intelligence.

Quite curious about this myself, I would actually like to see what would happen if true A:I was born, what would it do to the world...or for it. Quite interesting to see how such an intelligence would view the world.

Would Lazarus' Neohuman merge happen? Would a human or even complete organic genocide apocalypse happen? Or would they co-existed independently of each other?

Creating A:I would definitely count as playing god since a "life" even if artificial, is being created. Prometheus played with that concept a little. David is a synthetic and he questions to Holloway, why the space jockeys or engineers as I think they were called, created man, he then asks him why humans created androids and he gets an offensive answer from Holloway "because we could" he says. David replies that it would be a disappointment to hear that from a creator, Holloway further twists the knife by saying "good job you don't get disappointed" Not sure if David or any android in the series is true A:I or self-aware, or can feel emotions but David's facial reaction seems to imply something of that nature.

Jurassic park's Ian mentions that the creators of the park were so concerned with what they "could" do that they never thought about if they "should". Something that humans don't tend to think about often enough.

Combine A:I with Nanotech capabilities and the world will change, whether it would be for better or worse would be in the eye of the beholder, I keep referencing Transcendence but only because it is a fine example and humans are the bad guys in that movie and correctly so since their technophobia and their delusions of Will building an army(when he was in fact healing people) had them attack them first even though Will and his workers did nothing to them, in fact the whole movie plot exists because one of the extremists tried to assassinate Will when he was human.
Extremists can be funny though, sometimes you can almost, keyword there is almost understand where they are coming from but their actions are nearly always malevolent and worse than those who they consider "villains".

A real life example those groups in the middle east that view the western world as corrupt and evil, yet it is them that target innocents and strap bombs to children. Funny definition of good and evil they got.

People fear what they don't understand so technophobes regarding A:I is not surprising, movies like Terminator and Matrix don't help since despite being obvious fiction, it still influences people as does most popular culture. A:I or even androids might not actually be a step forward for mankind but a step back since slavery is now illegal but since machines won't count as people, there is nothing to stop humans from misusing them or treating them as slaves. Of course, some slaves eventually rebel and then you got your sci fi robot wars.

Death Penalty.
I think I said my piece on this already...Not so much playing god as being a grade A hypocrite. You know some killers have actually let their victim run i.e given them a chance to survive but prisons don't, the inmate is not only told about their impending death which is something that will hang over them until the day is due but when it comes, they are strapped down with no means of escape. So humorously, the death penalty and those involved in it are more cruel and ruthless than some serial killers.

Staff, leave his posts in place for future reference. Warning was made, posting vacation in place.

How droll, a brain in a metal body is exactly what a cyberman is actually, well usually...sometimes in utmost need, the metal is just grafted around the human body with mechanics and whatnot being surgically done before the frame is fully finished.

Cryogenics, not a bad solution for leap frogging through time since it does not add to the population because the frozen individual is effectively taken out of population until such time he or she awakes....if they actually do. Freezing people would just kill them, stasis needs to more than just ice. I would say some sort of time bubble or field perhaps.

Coven Mistress,

I don't think it will shock you to know I have previously imagined such scenarios.

Now the Russian 2045 Transhuman has the non-frozen cyborg model as one of he technological stepping stones towards singularity.

I guess when I used to think about this in regards to cryogenics, something always bothered me about the reanimation process.

Would the thawed out brain, be a vegetable, have no memories? However, Kaku's mentioned ability to record and inject memories could be a proactive work around to this potential problem. The 2045 or Transcendence process of uploading consciousness to a digital platform could also be a solution. I would hope they have it all sorted before they wake up this lot:

Humans will always try to play god, because the majority cannot stand the thought of being inferior to something or someone else.

Also I think sometimes it is not so much people playing god as it is curiosity of seeing just how far we can go with our ideas. Either playing god or just expanding our capabilities, both have the potential for positive and negative outcomes. It is just easier to get people to go against something new if it is made sound bad with a phrase like "playing god" as this touches on the sensitive subject of religion. It makes it sound like blasphemy and a good majority of earth's population are religious, so it strikes a chord with many when put into that context.

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist. And like that... he is gone." - The Usual Suspects


So let's take it all back to the Garden of Eden brother Stone Wolf.

The apple of knowledge is eaten by Adam and Eve. The choice was not made by us, but rather by them. After which Jesus is then sacrificed for all Sin.

There is no turning back the clock to saying, "Adam! Eve! Put the dammed apple down! You don't want to eat that, no seriously, don't eat that. If you do, we are all screwed."

The only direction now is forward.

Soaking up so much knowledge that the deception is revealed as both the consequence of beginning and the prerequisite to the end.

Cloning yes and man made black holes yes the rest is a no why no because all of which is made for or done in labs to protect others from war or deathly disease that can help cure others if very bad people kills or deals anything worse off then death they should be put to death right away so our prisons would be over run with prisoners. Those are my thoughts on the matter an I am sticking too it.

Thank you Coven Mistress ;)


Interesting question. I guess my answer depends on the following variable:

If God is truly infinite and Omnipotent then yes. Time travel would be a best effort to cheat the manifestation of the instant, which God would have the ability to do by default.

But IF God is finite, AND IF the physical plane of existence and illusion of time is supposed to be this grand scheme trick created by the devil than no. Time travel would be a pierce through the facade, but not playing God, as the creator would be aware that it's all bullshit. However, traveling through time alone, doesn't make the time traveler aware that it is all bullshit.

That is exactly the Problem Umyalanaraku, pushing boundaries.

The desire to keep pushing boundaries at the expense of anything else is what is going to be the talking apes' undoing, which would be fine if it didn't have so much collateral involved.
As I mentioned before, they keep focusing on what they can do, not what they should do. Curiosity beats caution it seems.

Some technology can be useful, others...not so much.
The cold war was just an idiotic dispute that would have had no winners, the nuke stand-off was just a mutually assured destruction waiting to happen. It even goes against Geneva convention I believe since civilians would have been targeted, whether by collateral or directly.

Lines should be drawn on what can be done and what can't.

Lines are drawn. What is often over looked, is who draws these lines. We'll come back to that in a bit.

History is written in blood, and by the victor. Though there never really is a winner in the long run. Win the war today to fight another one tomorrow. Allies become enemies and enemies become allies, war is something that will always be present so long as there are different ideologies. This is something a completely uniform society would solve but at what cost?

War is something I and the greedy monkeys agree on, that its good for "business" so to speak, for the greedy, there is money to be made from war.

The black market was doing good back then, supply and demand and all that rubbish. The Mafia made deals with the city to protect ports and docks for money, sometimes war makes one consider deals with the devil.

I will be honest and say I have not read all the posts in this thread...

That disclosure being said I have read the topic and can say without a doubt that the true life span of a human being is 60 years of age. Dogs have a general life span of 7 to 10 years, and all animals have some end point in their genetic make up along those lines. Based on the genetics of our DNA thats about the end of you and your bodies abilities... 60.
Modern medicine and standards of living are what have made living 20, 30, even 40 years past that point possible.

There are some who would argue that's already us playing God.

Humans are indeed living longer with some saying 125 being cap, which has yet to be reached. It was common to die at 50 at one time I believe. The standards of living has a part in how long one lives but the balance for it is weakness and dependence.

Severus,

I appreciate your perspective. We have become so used to this age of prescriptions and medical achievements that it is often overlooked. Man has been trying to cheat death for a long time, and I have to agree that at it is very core, extension of ones "time" is a form of playin' G.

In the high school I graduate from life expectancy for males was about age 25.

The way I see it, I've been playing the game with no extra lives and no continues for a good hot minute.

Holy cyborg zetta byte hard drives Batman!

Nice Find LI!

The cyborg age is coming hard & fast. As man attempts to cheat it's finite time, it becomes even more dependent on Deus Ex Machina's milk.

Machine heart going from 0-100...
REAL quick.

If a jury is making a decision in regards to a death penalty sentence, I would most certainly consider deciding if someone is to live or die playing G.

First off, in order to "play god", you have to believe and prove there is a god. Otherwise it isn't playing god, now is it? hehehe ;)

In order to "play" God, one does not have to prove anything, only define.

“God is not an Almighty Being watching over life on earth. God is the Event Horizon of Human Consciousness.”
― Abhijit Naskar

Oh it wasn't specific on which religion, I was speaking about a god in general.

It's a choose your own deity kind of adventure here. The title, image, or desired degree of divine status is truly at the whim of the participating posters.

I do not believe we are playing god, I don't think we are capable of achieving anything that isn't within our range of control. We may not have found a certain method to control something, but give it time and if it is conceivable within our brains, humans will find a way eventually. To play god would be to achieve something entirely humanly inconceivable.

LI,

Water found in the constellation Aquarius? It's a trap!

Interstellar travel for a water based being is still a bit of a big problem though.

The discussed work around would be a generational ship:

I'm actually very interested in the data that the machine eye in the universal sky will report in regard to these exoplanets.

ISO LI,

My application of the scripture is different. I'd say that it is playing G precisely because big homey says, Don't do that.

Yet man does it anyway.

It is no secret that the Gods can sacrifice human lives at will and discretion. By doing so as human, this is among the most flagrant infractions in regards to playing G.

I mean something beyond our capacity to understand or know...ever...something so bizarre and complex, our brains could never know about it or understand it.

Genocide has been a man-made excuse for Man in his quest for 'Playing God'. The Nazi regime exterminated a whole group of humans, with the survivors clutching at nail and tooth for survival. Today, what has been prophesised by Hitler is revealing itself to be a prophecy. The poor fella should not have killed, for sure... what other ways could he have utitlised to deal with the problem, do you think?

Mass murders, killing, serial murders, isolated killings, crimes of passion... if you think about it, these are man's way of 'Playing God'. If you could resole the problem by using the gnosis method of identifying and resolving a problem... if there is even a problem... but then, why would Man try to play god if he did not forsee a problem, in the first place.... Man need not play God.

This is where the Vampiric Will/Philosophy comes into the picture. You are not the experience. If one is ble to identify a problem, then Man would come to realise that he is, in fact, NOT the problem, and be able to distinguish his own personal bias towards the problem and enable him to opt for an alternate solution.

Man 'Plays God' because he is weak. It is part of the Human Condition.

Mankind will always strive to be the superior being in every way possible, that will not stop so long as humans exist. The problem is that no matter how much we advance, it will never be considered enough.

This thread has been automatically closed for length.