Jurassic Park, reality?

[Acriku]

Thanks for asking that Twin-Head :)

First off, you have migratory apes going around the world in 80 days( not really), they branch off as in they seperate into tribes or groups, the groups that migrated to a place where perfect conditions were met, and thus they SLOWLY VERY SLOWLY evolved into australeopithicus genus etc. And the groups that didn't migrate to those conditions simply didn't evolve. TAKE THAT TWIN! :)

And about the Big Bang, now even though this may not be true, let's assume it for now for the sake of argument: why can't something come from nothing? Do we set the rules and standards of the universe? Do we know what is suppose to and not suppose to happen? You don't, I don't, so if you can't comprehend it then don't argue against it. Just like Ex said, where did God come from? We can't comprehend that, so how can we comprehend the big bang theory?

Boy I love people who are that small-minded in such matters :)

[exatreide]

Who says evolution has to be slow?

look at the dog in the past 700 or 800 years.

going from 3 or 4 different types to 400-500 different types. each having a speific task or thing it evolved to do ect.

so evolution dosnt have to be slow.

[ordos45]

Ah, much like quoting the bible as fact, you are quoting Evolution as fact. Its still a theory, or is it....some textbooks say theory, others say fact, and others say Charles Darwin was a drunk who had sex with the Captain's wife and didn't get paid for months of minor work on the ship before he realized it.

Ahh, wonderful diversity of opinions from the United States educational system. We just don't get to compare all the differences in class, something about teachers not wanting to lose their jobs?

What was the topic again? ???

[Anathema]

The exploitation and destruction of life does NOT please God. At least not the God Christians pray to. Using LIVING BEINGS as raw material or spare parts is hideous. It makes no difference that they're embryos. The same thing applies to animals, not just humans, and I don't think anyone can be twisted enough to say that embryos are less than animals!

I know where to draw the line. I would rather die in agony than have my life saved by the destruction of another. I could never live with myself afterwards.

I was talking about genetic modification of animals in order to make them grow human compatible organs. You would rather die in agony rather then have your life saved by the destruction of another- does that include animals? I assume not, because you mentioned you were not a vegetarian and shamelessly eat animals out of LUXURY while you say you cannot use animals for LIFE SAVING situations! That may be against the will of your God, but atheists like me do not believe in your God and should not be forced to abide the bible!

Besides, human has been holding lifestock for millenia, and has been breeding out specific types of those species- after millenia, they have become much different then the original wild creatures as they produce more milk, eggs or are just plain fatter. GM is an acceleration of the process and nothing more!

[Edric O]

Being a vegetarian would accomplish nothing. PLANTS ARE JUST AS ALIVE AS ANIMALS! Whatever I do, I must kill to eat. It makes no difference if I eat plants or animals.

We must kill for food because we ALL need to eat ALL the time. It's just not feasible to stop eating, if you know what I mean...

However, the people that could benefit from transplants of GM organs are few and far apart (compared will those that need to eat - meaning all the humans on the planet). And so in their case, killing can be avoided. And it should be. They will die, true. But who are you to say their lives are more important than those of the living beings you would kill for them?

It is irrelevant whether embryos are fully human or not. The fact is, they are ALIVE. Killing any living being for anything other than food is evil. (God made us so that we need to kill to eat - that's why I think killing for food is perfectly okay)

Really Earthnuker, doesn't the idea of growing things for the sole purpose of harvesting their organs seem a little sick to you?

I am not forcing you to abide by the Bible. But I AM forcing you to respect certain moral values, not all of which are Christian. Just like you are being forced not to murder.

The argument of "where did it come from?" is stupid and ridiculous, both in relation to God and the Big Bang. Neither God or the Big Bang are a product of our universe, SO THEY CAN VERY WELL COME FROM NOTHING! Do I have to remind you that time only exists inside the universe?

Ex, please control yourself. The Bible does not state the age of the Earth anywhere. All we know is how far back Adam was created. But man was the very last stage of creation.

[Anathema]

I don't think that keeping an animal for the purpose of saving lives is any more sick then keeping an animal so you can eat it- both appear a little sick to me, but the one not any more then the other.

And why would an animal suffer because he is geneticly modified? The only significant change is that their organs have different proteines on the outside so human immune system wouldn't reject them.

Why would rejection of GM be a common value? Even the fact that a lot of people do not stand against GM would make that argument false. And if you say it is against the will of God to implement GM, you prove yourself that it is a christian value, not a common one.

Plenty of people could benefit from those organs. Do you have any idea how many people are waiting in hospitals till either they are on top of the list, or die? If somebody doesn't want an organ that was obtained from an animal, he should have the right to refuse it but that doesn't mean atheists can't have any!

GM is already used on bacteria to produce insuline to help diabetis patients. Do you wish to deny them their insuline, and force them to live lives in wich they cannot do anything without getting tired or even die prematurely?

Do you honestly rescent GM because it's immoral, or are you just disgusted by the idea of receiving organs from an animal?

[Edric O]

Both. The thought of raising an animal just for harvesting its organs disgusts me, because it's more than immoral, it's an atrocity. What if a highly advanced alien species, compared to which we are like animals are compared to us, decided to use us for organ harvesting? Would you still agree to it then?

I do not extend animal/plant rights to single-cell organisms, however. After all, we kill bacteria all the time just by being alive.

The right of all humans to live is also not a common value. Just ask any terrorist organization. There are NO moral values that all humans can agree on. So what do you suggest? Let everyone live by their own values? Fine, but then I suppose you'll have to allow the KKK to persecute black people and not condemn Osama Bin Laden for blowing up a building every once in a while... Hey, they don't share your values!

"Death is nothing to us" - isn't that what the atheist philosopher Epicurus said? Well, I agree. But for different reasons. It's better to die than to lose your humanity.

[Anathema]

Why do you think complex organisms have more rights then single cell organisms? Plants are not sentient, yet you think that eating them is as bad as eating animals, yet you don't think tinkering with single cell organisms is bad? Exactly where DO you pull the line?

[Acriku]

Earthnuker, I believe the term "digging holes" is in effect with Edric. *takes edric's shovel*

Edric, we kill TO SURVIVE. We don't just eat them, we use their hide for cold, we use their blubber for oil, we make weapons out of bones, we have and currently do many things. So if we kill an animal for its organs, it's killing TO SURVIVE. Which is what we do anyways.

There is no right to survive, there is an individual NEED for survival. Everything about us is made to SURVIVE. So we either do it or we don't.

[TMA_1]

you notice that people do this a lot. well you see the thing is, I AM RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG. when YOU CAPITALIZE THINGS YOU LOOK NEEDY. STOP capitalizing THINGS GUYS. lol

[Acriku]

I capitalize to get my point across further. Like emphasizing my point.

[Twin-Head]

By funny i mean weird. And those weird people even believe in the Big Bang Theory. Allwrite. So out in the middle of nowhere, Where there is nothing, NOTHING. Something explodes. Have you heard of an explosion that creates something? Well somehow this explosion creates Earth and some little bacteria thing that evolves into people and everything. If we evolved fron monkeys, Howcome Their aren't half-man Half-monkeys walking around? And if you say that they fully evolved, howcome there are still monkeys?Huh? Huh, answer that evolutionists!

WARNING

flame reply sorta......kinda........not realy....maybe......

oh and whare did god come from? boom bang there he was? no? did he create himself? was he cloned perhaps? Satins alter ego?

ever here of a little thing called carbon dating? we can date things back to a few billion years before the carbon fades away complety. now acording to the the book of gore and sex. er bibil. it was only created recently.

we have proof that the earth is older than 50,000 years. do we have proof that the god created the earth when he did? that the earth the stars and the heaven is only a few thousand of years old? talk about weird......

becouse not all monekys evolved into apes which evolved into apes. which evolved into man.

there for there are still monekys and apes that wouldnt have evolved into men.

and there were. they just died out.

sorry but that half minded post pissed me off.

Still, how come there aren't half men-Half monkeys walking around?

And you don't believe in god because you;ve never seen him. there is plenty of proof in the world. Have you ever seen a million bucks? That doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Plus how do we know that carbon dating really is true? No body was there when the artifact was buried that is still alive today to prove that it is that old. If you want to know proof about god, just pick up a Bible andstart reading. And where is your proof that earth is 50,000 years old? And there is proof that god created the earth, just read the bible.

[Acriku]

Twin, there aren't half men half ape because they all died out, they couldn't survive in today's world. Or any world for that matter, thus they evolved into a fitter species.

And it isn't because we can't see him that I believe he doesn't exist, I have my own reasons that are more complex than "i can't see him". We know carbon-dating is true because we know carbon exists in all life and with specific amounts on Earth so far, and we know when they die the carbon starts to decay at a regular speed, so it is true. But not accurate mind you, it only gives you an estimate.

And you can't say the Bible is proof, because it's the basis of the religion. The very essense that is questioned. It simply isn't proof.

[Twin-Head]

If you don't want to believe me now, just wait till you die. Then you'll be sorry that you didn't listen to me now because you'll go to hell. And i'll be in heaven watching you and feeling pity for you.

[Acriku]

I agree - we shall see :) Or we don't...maybe we will just die and nothing else after it :O The horror! ::)

[nemafakei]

Scientists and their own ends? Their own ends are usually simply the pursuit of knowledge (what others do with science is beyond their control). Religion is where own ends are more relevant - because of the gospel exaggeration scenario above.

Well... you ask about definitions of better.

First, look at damage and benefit. If all it concerns is one person dying to save two more, then the net benefit is positive, so the action is good. It is often less simple... decisions must be made between two fundamentals - eg life and morality. Edric, you say morality, others would not agree. You cannot force a minimum morality in this way alone on others, because that would assume morality is superior to (almost) everything. Moreover, each case must be judged on its own merits.

[gryphon]

This is about cloning right ?

Exactly how was Eve created ?

[Twin-Head]

From Adams rib bone.

[DjCiD]

Same way he created man i supose, cept he used mans rib.

NIV

Genesis 1

26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [1] and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

27 So God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."

Footnotes

[1]1:26 Hebrew; Syriac all the wild animals

NIV

Genesis 2

Adam and Eve

4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created.

When the Lord God made the earth and the heavens- 5 and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth [1] and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth [2] and there was no man to work the ground, 6 but streams [3] came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground- 7 the Lord God formed the man [4] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

Footnotes

[1]2:5 Or land ; also in verse

[2]2:5 Or land ; also in verse

[3]2:6 Or mist

[4]2:7 The Hebrew for man (adam) sounds like and may be related to the Hebrew for ground ( adamah ); it is also the name Adam (see Gen. 2:20).

NIV

Genesis 2

20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.

But for Adam [1] no suitable helper was found. 21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs [2] and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib [3] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

23 The man said,

"This is now bone of my bones

and flesh of my flesh;

she shall be called 'woman, [4] '

for she was taken out of man."

24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

25 The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.

Footnotes

[1]2:20 Or the man

[2]2:21 Or took part of the man's side

[3]2:22 Or part

[4]2:23 The Hebrew for woman sounds like the Hebrew for man.

[gryphon]

"Same way he created man i supose, cept he used mans rib."

Don't think so. The man he created was the first human. The woman was created from that man / human.

"This is now bone of my bones

and flesh of my flesh;

she shall be called 'woman',

for she was taken out of man."

Sounds a bit like cloning to me.

Except for the gender change. That's more like genetic engenering.

[exatreide]

well maybe the hebrews were just talking about aliens insted of giants ect.

the ancinet hebrew word for giant is "beings from above". makes you think dosnt it.....

[TMA_1]

Nobody on this forum gets what the bible says. its hopeless.lol

[ordos45]

I get what the Bible says, more or less. I'm just trying to be more open to other views, even if they can't change mine. But no, I did not know that fact about the word "giant".

[DjCiD]

Sounds a bit like cloning to me.

Except for the gender change. That's more like genetic engenering.

hey as long as its God doing the gentic enginering and not us (humans) thats fine by me.

[Timenn]

TMA_1, why do you think that all those religion wars started (I mean WARS) because people interpreted them in their own way. But then there appeared a stupid group of people, and they decided that they were the only who understood the bible right.

Now you are doing some sort of thing too