Jump to content
IGNORED

Georgia Guidestones


GORDO

Recommended Posts

that is utterly ignorant. do you know where are you going? probably not. genetically engineered food has proven to malfunction human reproductive hormones (among dozens of other stuff). you probably wont realize it, but our offsprings definitely will.

 

Propaganda.

 

on whose side is more likely to be the propaganda joke? i bet on those who make money out of such lethal chemicals.

 

you can't deny the fact that such chemicals are designed to kill certain cells. some of those cells (either slightly mutated or not) reside in your body. your body is actually a sack, a biotope for millions and millions of bacteria. without them we can't live or perform bodily functions. you cannot isolate your 'target' cell to make it the only one vurnerable to your 'attack' without in any way influencing another that lives in simbiosis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply
viruses, bacteria, insects will all outlive us.

Why are you so stubborn? We do things differently to other species. Does that make us better? Does that make us special?

 

 

Here's a nice quote that sums it up: 'We crave progress as our best hope for retaining human arrogance in an evolutionary world.' - Stephen Jay Gould.

 

Virii are not alive, it's like saying gold will outlive us. And I will probably outlive (unless I die in the next months) pretty much any insect or bacteria you can name. And i'm pretty sure when I die there will still be humans around. Will insects will be around when humanity is extinct?, I have no idea and I don't think you could have one either.

 

I already told you that "better" is subjective and anything can be seen as better or worse depending on who is judging and how he is arguing. I'm not arguing any such thing, what I'm arguing is that we can guide reproduction to suit or needs, present or future. It has been done, it is being done and it will be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you so stubborn? we're distinct to other species in many different ways that can be perfectly described, whether as individuals, as a collective, in our behavior, in the way we adapt non genetically to environments, in the way we adapt environments to us... You can't deny this. Youk know this.

 

And yeah in the long run there will still be life... human life.

Chen is right. Consider it from a simple point of view: if you had a garden and one lovely day there comes a russian family (or whoever else), chops down your lovely trees to make a cottage, digs a hole where your carrots grow to make a pond and uses your hanging towels to make the bed for family. would you just stand there and offer him a cup of tea for a warm welcome?

 

we are distinct from other living beings, but so are they from us. we all come from the same "source". your idea is to bring a sense of selfishness to the whole thing. if you can talk and make things work that doesn't mean you're something that is above other living beings. remember, humans are very fragile beings. without intelect we'd probably extinct long ago. our 'weapon' for survival are the brains. but that still doesn't mean we're are eligible to turn every single organic cell into a genetically altered one. or to turn the vast forests into deserts for that case.

 

even G.W. Bush once adequately put: "I think man and fish can coexist peacefuly". lol

 

 

that is utterly ignorant. do you know where are you going? probably not. genetically engineered food has proven to malfunction human reproductive hormones (among dozens of other stuff). you probably wont realize it, but our offsprings definitely will.

 

Propaganda.

 

on whose side is more likely to be the propaganda joke? i bet on those who make money out of such lethal chemicals.

 

you can't deny the fact that such chemicals are designed to kill certain cells. some of those cells (either slightly mutated or not) reside in your body. your body is actually a sack, a biotope for millions and millions of bacteria. without them we can't live or perform bodily functions. you cannot isolate your 'target' cell to make it the only one vurnerable to your 'attack' without in any way influencing another that lives in simbiosis.

 

To me you're not making any sense in either post. What chemicals are you talking about? And how are those related to genetically engineered food? You'll have to break it down for me please.

 

I don't really know what are we arguing anymore. Chengod never answered to me how is that guideline in conflicting with evolution so I dunno.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How the guidline conflicts with evolution is it seems to state that the purpose of evolution is to "progress" humans.

Evolution==progress.

 

Viruses might be considerd alive:

http://www.astahost.com/info.php/viruses-c...live_t4368.html

http://www.cnrs.fr/cw/en/pres/compress/mimivirus.htm

 

If you would like to exclude viruses from being alive, I can state for certain that bacteria will outlive the human species (why must you make me be a pedant?), and can state with 99.9% certainty that insects will outlive the human species.

 

I apologize for confusing "better" and "special". I am stating that humans are not special. We can adapt our environments and we can guide reproduction, but we do not know if it will enable the human race to survive in the long-term.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a question: If we're all going to die anyways and the cockroaches are the only thing that will be there in the end, what's it matter if we play god for our short stay on earth? It will at least give us a CHANCE of surviving long enough to get some humanity off of earth and exploring space, perhaps until the end of time. It also gave us enough food and medicine for you and your loved ones to survive in this day and age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what i don't get is where does the thing say anything about evolution or it's purpose? evolution doesn't have a purpose. If it did, it would be to make species more fit to their environment. you know survival of the fittest and stuff... uhh oooh there's that word fitness there :)

 

Dunno seems to me that future generations of humans can deal with future problems, including those that are unexpected consequences of the actions of past generation of humans. So yes we don't know, but we can make things better for us, and i guess people will constantly try to do so. With guided reproduction we can change things in only a couple of generations.

 

When I say "special" I mean "different".

 

anyway less blahblah more creepy cool x-filey stones.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there's no problem with doing it, I just tend to agree with the opinion that we aren't special, and maybe if we realise this, we can actually start to work together for our species instead of just assuming that we're top dog, and everything is gonna be alright with our stupid racism/sexism/nationalism/theism/any other ism...(except the one that posts one here...right ~ism? we loves you)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest countchocula
Here's a question: If we're all going to die anyways and the cockroaches are the only thing that will be there in the end, what's it matter if we play god for our short stay on earth? It will at least give us a CHANCE of surviving long enough to get some humanity off of earth and exploring space, perhaps until the end of time. It also gave us enough food and medicine for you and your loved ones to survive in this day and age.

 

Actually cockroaches might not outlive humans, or for very long at least. The statement that cockroaches can survive nuclear war is a myth. Another reason they would not live very long after we are gone is because they have become very dependent on humans. They get sustenance from our food waste and once that source is gone they would have to find a new way to get food. They might be able to find a new way to get food, but whatever wipes us out is going to be one hell of an event so who knows if they will survive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there's no problem with doing it, I just tend to agree with the opinion that we aren't special, and maybe if we realise this, we can actually start to work together for our species instead of just assuming that we're top dog, and everything is gonna be alright with our stupid racism/sexism/nationalism/theism/any other ism...(except the one that posts one here...right ~ism? we loves you)

 

When you say special do you imply some sense or religiosity or a feeling of superiority attached to it? cus that's not what i mean, i mean we are special because we as a species or as individuals have qualities that make us so so much different and unique from the rest of life in this planet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gordo..and other species have qualities that make them completely unique and different from us. So what? You just reaffirmed the quote that I posted.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gordo..and other species have qualities that make them completely unique and different from us. So what? You just reaffirmed the quote that I posted.

 

SO nothing matters then we have no free will why argue anything then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me you're not making any sense in either post. What chemicals are you talking about? And how are those related to genetically engineered food? You'll have to break it down for me please.

 

I don't really know what are we arguing anymore. Chengod never answered to me how is that guideline in conflicting with evolution so I dunno.

well, first you have to understand that genetical mutation can commence when the gene is exposed to severe environmental and behavioral change also. i point out the chemicals because of their severe influence on the genes of autochtone plants (or animals) of that very region where such chemicals are used.

 

by genetically modifying fruit for instance, you make it resistible to disease, pests, drought, etc. you can also modify its shape, color, taste, size... but you also influence on how this plant interracts with its environment. to cut it short, by making it a 'super-plant' you break the one crucial element of life other animals (or other plants) depend on.

 

with genetical alteration you modify one variety of plants and know which and how. with chemicals you directly influence on environment which then undergoes a shock and the consequences can never be predicted.

 

i hope my point became more clear, but i'm sorry my primary language is not english...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

about evolution

 

there is a theory (or movement if you like) you might already be familiar with called transhumanism. in general it describes an idea of some perpetual drive in gene that also causes its optimization. how it is directly influenced is yet to be explored i think. this idea says that at some point far in future natural environment can no longer be a variable in this evolution. that mainly goes for human race and artificial intelligence, but nonetheless the same question arises. if human race with its infinite mind can produce another environment that will be even further optimized for everything alive there, nature as we know it might become 'obsolete'. IMO this is a crazy idea. even if we'll be able to compute an exponential development of life (if you take into account that it actually took 4.5 billion years for nature to 'compute' life to the point where it is today) there is still an issue if this optimization turns out to be wrong. or a dead end of life on earth.

 

if i connect that with geneticaly engineered food i say that it's nothig but playing with fire. like if you have a house that is about to collapse and you start fixing it by buying new kitchen appliances instead of reinforcing the very structure.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did this just pop into existence recently? You would think all of the doomsayers before this would have pointed to that thing as evidence

 

built in the 80s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me you're not making any sense in either post. What chemicals are you talking about? And how are those related to genetically engineered food? You'll have to break it down for me please.

 

I don't really know what are we arguing anymore. Chengod never answered to me how is that guideline in conflicting with evolution so I dunno.

well, first you have to understand that genetical mutation can commence when the gene is exposed to severe environmental and behavioral change also. i point out the chemicals because of their severe influence on the genes of autochtone plants (or animals) of that very region where such chemicals are used.

 

by genetically modifying fruit for instance, you make it resistible to disease, pests, drought, etc. you can also modify its shape, color, taste, size... but you also influence on how this plant interracts with its environment. to cut it short, by making it a 'super-plant' you break the one crucial element of life other animals (or other plants) depend on.

 

with genetical alteration you modify one variety of plants and know which and how. with chemicals you directly influence on environment which then undergoes a shock and the consequences can never be predicted.

 

i hope my point became more clear, but i'm sorry my primary language is not english...

 

I agree, but no one can ever known the full consequences of their actions. We can only be careful.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gordo..and other species have qualities that make them completely unique and different from us. So what? You just reaffirmed the quote that I posted.

 

SO nothing matters then we have no free will why argue anything then.

 

free will is outside the scope of this argument. Do you honestly not understand what I'm saying?

We are not "special". We are not a result of evolutionary "progress". We are the result of an accident.

This is the idea that we have to overcome to understand our place in the world.

 

The stones are cool, but "guiding fitness" (eugenics) is fucking bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think our brains are tuned to a different frequency or something. I'm not saying any of those things you mention. I'm not talking about any kind of progress or superiority within our species. I'm not sure why you would even bring those kinds of issues to attention, What i'm talking about is about significant qualitative differences that no other species or group of species in this planet shares, and not acknowledging this is just plain stubborn, it makes no difference whether this was a result of an accident or not is is just the way it is.

 

And yes, it all comes down to free will, because we have the ability to understand and transform the world around us, we understand genetics, we understand evolution, we CAN use that knowledge for our benefit. And that is all I been saying and for some reason you think this contradicts the principles of evolution (that IMO shows a lack of understanding of the idea of evolution but I've been patient trying to understand what you're on about, I still don't know what you are thinking). What you were arguing, is that is doesn't make any difference whether we use these abilities or not, because in the end evolution will trump it and that's basically destroying the concept of free will. If we can't make a difference then we don't have no choices.

 

guiding human reproduction may or may not be bullshit but it certainly isn't an incorrect view of Darwinian evolution. Because it wouldn't be Darwinian it would be human guided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think our brains are tuned to a different frequency or something. I'm not saying any of those things you mention. I'm not talking about any kind of progress or superiority within our species. I'm not sure why you would even bring those kinds of issues to attention, What i'm talking about is about significant qualitative differences that no other species or group of species in this planet shares, and not acknowledging this is just plain stubborn, it makes no difference whether this was a result of an accident or not is is just the way it is.

 

And yes, it all comes down to free will, because we have the ability to understand and transform the world around us, we understand genetics, we understand evolution, we CAN use that knowledge for our benefit. And that is all I been saying and for some reason you think this contradicts the principles of evolution (that IMO shows a lack of understanding of the idea of evolution but I've been patient trying to understand what you're on about, I still don't know what you are thinking). What you were arguing, is that is doesn't make any difference whether we use these abilities or not, because in the end evolution will trump it and that's basically destroying the concept of free will. If we can't make a difference then we don't have no choices.

 

guiding human reproduction may or may not be bullshit but it certainly isn't an incorrect view of Darwinian evolution. Because it wouldn't be Darwinian it would be human guided.

no man... there's no our benefit. there's benefit for everything else also. it must be. and we don't understand genetics, nor the evolution.

 

this pretentious technocracy led us to believe we can solve things that are beyond our comprehension. if you want to make a difference, look into yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

guiding human reproduction may or may not be bullshit but it certainly isn't an incorrect view of Darwinian evolution. Because it wouldn't be Darwinian it would be human guided.

 

Darwinian evolution has been tagged "survival of the fittest".

The implication that we can guide reproduction to create the most fit, is bullshit.

That was my original premise, sorry if that was too hard to see.

We most certainly do not understand genetics or evolution. We have a very good theory for evolution, but it hasn't been decided once and for all how evolution works (and no, I'm not talking about intelligent design).

 

As to a lack of understanding, I'd say read some essays on evolution. Gould is a good place to start, he writes well without dumbing things down. Dawkins is good, but he is a prick and his ego shows through in his writings.

 

Now onto the stones..why choose Hebrew as a major language? Zionist conspiracy? New World Order? Masons? Can someone please go to that old guys garage and find out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest countchocula

I am really curious to know who built it. I mean who could have financed it and why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think our brains are tuned to a different frequency or something. I'm not saying any of those things you mention. I'm not talking about any kind of progress or superiority within our species. I'm not sure why you would even bring those kinds of issues to attention, What i'm talking about is about significant qualitative differences that no other species or group of species in this planet shares, and not acknowledging this is just plain stubborn, it makes no difference whether this was a result of an accident or not is is just the way it is.

 

And yes, it all comes down to free will, because we have the ability to understand and transform the world around us, we understand genetics, we understand evolution, we CAN use that knowledge for our benefit. And that is all I been saying and for some reason you think this contradicts the principles of evolution (that IMO shows a lack of understanding of the idea of evolution but I've been patient trying to understand what you're on about, I still don't know what you are thinking). What you were arguing, is that is doesn't make any difference whether we use these abilities or not, because in the end evolution will trump it and that's basically destroying the concept of free will. If we can't make a difference then we don't have no choices.

 

guiding human reproduction may or may not be bullshit but it certainly isn't an incorrect view of Darwinian evolution. Because it wouldn't be Darwinian it would be human guided.

no man... there's no our benefit. there's benefit for everything else also. it must be. and we don't understand genetics, nor the evolution.

 

this pretentious technocracy led us to believe we can solve things that are beyond our comprehension. if you want to make a difference, look into yourself.

 

That's a pretty silly idea really. If I build a bridge it is to my benefit and probably for some other people too, it won't be for the birds' benefit and i can't possiblly account for the needs of the rest of life on the planet when I plan and so something that will help me, like going to the kitchen and pour myself some water to drink. If i start breeding more potent weed it won't be for the benefit of pot smoking monkeys and I will not care a damn if it benefits them or not.

 

To make a difference I could as well poison the water supply of my city, I don't need to look into myself to do a difference, I must only plan and do.

 

Also, of course we understand evolution, because it is an invention of the human mind (Darwin's mind to be more specific), maybe we don't fully understand how all species came to be but that's not evolution, the process of natural selection is quite simple and is fully understood. And of course we understand genetics, maybe not fully, but we understand it enough to have invented a word for it and actually manipulate genes, create paternity tests and have a better understanding of the process of natural selection.

 

What pretentious technocracy? Just take a good hard look at the computer you are using.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.