Log in

View Full Version : Your views about genetic modification



danyboy27
26th November 2008, 15:46
what your opinion about the subject?

Killfacer
26th November 2008, 16:47
You mean like GM crops or grafting cannons into people's stomachs?

danyboy27
26th November 2008, 16:53
You mean like GM crops or grafting cannons into people's stomachs?

gm crops, medical use etc.

Dóchas
26th November 2008, 17:41
we could make an army of superhuman commies and....ill leave the rest up to you :D

Jazzratt
26th November 2008, 17:50
As a transhumanist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism) I view genetic modification as a highly desireable thing and a very positive technology. The uses and benefits are endless - from increasing crop yields to growing useful proteins (and other chemicals) in transgenic animals to overcoming humanity's inherent genetic flaws. It's all brilliant :D

danyboy27
26th November 2008, 20:18
As a transhumanist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism) I view genetic modification as a highly desireable thing and a very positive technology. The uses and benefits are endless - from increasing crop yields to growing useful proteins (and other chemicals) in transgenic animals to overcoming humanity's inherent genetic flaws. It's all brilliant :D

agreed on that!
but still, i think its important to be carefull with all that, do the proper test etc.

i dont know you, but where i live, eople got a poor opinion of the genetics.
they think its all evil, its dangerous etc.

but the truth is, if iran is able to feed its people, its mainly beccause of that.

Killfacer
26th November 2008, 20:22
Any medical developments of any kind i am entirely supportive of, yet i do not know much about GM crops and their effects on our world.

Bud Struggle
26th November 2008, 21:35
As a transhumanist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism) I view genetic modification as a highly desireable thing and a very positive technology. The uses and benefits are endless - from increasing crop yields to growing useful proteins (and other chemicals) in transgenic animals to overcoming humanity's inherent genetic flaws. It's all brilliant :D

As a Borgeiose Capitalists I also like the idea of genetic modification. I can pay so that my children and children's children are genetically modified to be better than all those poor people out there so we can keep our money and make it grow and rule over all those that can't afford such modifications to their blood live.

Good plan.

wigsa
26th November 2008, 22:38
I think it's a positive thing,however it is unnecessary.It is an excuse for the exploitive capitalist nations of the west to avoid the real issue,which is the uneven distribution of the world's resources.There is enough rice,wheat and corn in the world to give everyone on this planet 3,000 calories a day.And that is before meat and dairy products.Therefore I see GM as an opportunity to ignore the real issue and create a convenient solution instead.

However in the world today,I think it could play a part,albeit temporary,in the current fight against world hunger.

danyboy27
26th November 2008, 22:38
As a Borgeiose Capitalists I also like the idea of genetic modification. I can pay so that my children and children's children are genetically modified to be better than all those poor people out there so we can keep our money and make it grow and rule over all those that can't afford such modifications to their blood live.

Good plan.

and then, all the good move tomk did for month to get unrestricted vanished.


on topic now:

i heard something about bourgeois science, and that back then the soviet union decided not to go in certain field beccause of that, genetic was one of them, it didnt stopped Stalin to paid some guy to make Uber soldier by trying to mix gorilla and human genes. it failed.

Bud Struggle
26th November 2008, 22:53
and then, all the good move tomk did for month to get unrestricted vanished. I was being sarcastic! :crying:

The problem is--it cost's money and if rich people get it--who are they going to spend their money on, themselves or you?

TheCultofAbeLincoln
27th November 2008, 07:59
The problem is--it cost's money and if rich people get it--who are they going to spend their money on, themselves or you?

This is my concern exactly. If a group of people find a geenie, the only one who's going to matter is the first, when he wishes all the rest are dead.

S.O.I
27th November 2008, 11:50
you anti gm-food guys better start watching penn & teller...

Killfacer
27th November 2008, 12:07
you anti gm-food guys better start watching penn & teller...


No one said anything against GM foods.

danyboy27
27th November 2008, 17:15
no matter what people say about we can feed the whole world with the current food output, i would rather promote GM for third world countries so they can grow their own food withotu having to wait for the others to giver them stuff.

FreeFocus
27th November 2008, 21:40
I think it's a positive thing,however it is unnecessary.It is an excuse for the exploitive capitalist nations of the west to avoid the real issue,which is the uneven distribution of the world's resources.There is enough rice,wheat and corn in the world to give everyone on this planet 3,000 calories a day.And that is before meat and dairy products.Therefore I see GM as an opportunity to ignore the real issue and create a convenient solution instead.

However in the world today,I think it could play a part,albeit temporary,in the current fight against world hunger.

Agreed, and good point.

I think genetic modification is something we have to be careful with, but when used for social benefit it can be great. Currently, however, capitalists are using it to wreak havoc in the lives of poor farmers in places like India and South America. They've modified some crops to strip the soil of all its nutrients, and these same crops die after a year. Additionally, you have the whole copyright thing, with corporations modifying crops and copyrighting them, selling the seeds to farmers, and then claiming that they own the entire type of crop. Corrupt governments in these countries enable this, selling the people of the country down the river to get a cut of the profits.

Ele'ill
28th November 2008, 13:42
I am against GM.

danyboy27
28th November 2008, 15:17
I am against GM.

even if it would allow millions of african to cultivate wheat and corn in poorly fertile soil?

wigsa
28th November 2008, 15:20
I am against GM.

Why??

TheCultofAbeLincoln
29th November 2008, 00:17
I am against GM.

A noble position, but it's too late I'm afraid.

The heirs to this planet are being created, and we are already their slaves.

All that remains is the extinction.

Akim
1st March 2009, 17:43
GM food gives companys like Monsanto too much power. They have allready sued farmers in US and Canada , for "copyright infringment". I dont think there is any danger in eating em , but it`s alarming how easily these crops and animals can spread into the wild and change the environment.
Also the farmers who plant gm seeds have to buy new seeds avery year and pay to the biotech company technological fee.

RASHskins
2nd March 2009, 21:06
Yea i really don't like how they can destroy whole ecosystems so easily.

danyboy27
2nd March 2009, 21:40
GM food gives companys like Monsanto too much power. They have allready sued farmers in US and Canada , for "copyright infringment". I dont think there is any danger in eating em , but it`s alarming how easily these crops and animals can spread into the wild and change the environment.
Also the farmers who plant gm seeds have to buy new seeds avery year and pay to the biotech company technological fee.


i think the main problem is not the GM but the way this technology is controlled by a fews corporation. GM food in place like the third world would be a really good thing. Iran and some countries already developed GM food, allowing their people to get better harvest, and more food without using any chemical.

at the end, we should not blame the technology beccause some bad people use it the wrong way.

Dejavu
2nd March 2009, 21:41
As a transhumanist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism) I view genetic modification as a highly desireable thing and a very positive technology. The uses and benefits are endless - from increasing crop yields to growing useful proteins (and other chemicals) in transgenic animals to overcoming humanity's inherent genetic flaws. It's all brilliant :D


I happen to agree with this post.

Dejavu
2nd March 2009, 21:53
I think it's a positive thing,however it is unnecessary.It is an excuse for the exploitive capitalist nations of the west to avoid the real issue,which is the uneven distribution of the world's resources.There is enough rice,wheat and corn in the world to give everyone on this planet 3,000 calories a day.And that is before meat and dairy products.Therefore I see GM as an opportunity to ignore the real issue and create a convenient solution instead.

However in the world today,I think it could play a part,albeit temporary,in the current fight against world hunger.

So capitalist nations are using GM as an excuse to cover up their plans for massive starvation of entire populaces? I have to admit, I've heard a lot of theories but not quite that one.

I guess my question is 'why?' I mean if they ( capitalists) already produce a massive supply of food of which much of it isn't distributed out on the market ( according to you) then why would they want to increase the supply of food through GM if the only economic result would be the lowering of the price of the food they already posses?

Its like saying drug cartels would prefer if more drugs were GM-ed and distributed into the market to compete with the drugs they already control ( in terms of price.) Why would they want to decrease the price of their drugs by increasing its supply? How would the not profit less?

It seems to me that if food producers ( capitalist) really wanted to starve millions for the sake of keeping the price of food high by decreasing its supply in the market, then GM-ing food for the purpose of selling that food would be rather counterproductive to that goal and the last thing they would want to do.

I'm interested in this position. Where are the statistics accumulated to show there is a near super abudendance of food in existence? Where is the evidence to point to capitalism the distinguishing factor 'hiding' or destroying the rest of the food?

And even if it were true, how do you reconcile people's supposed positive right to food with their negative right not to have the product of their labor taken from them by force? ( I might be incorrectly assuming that you believe the laborers should keep the full product of their labor. If you do not believe this please explain why and omit the last couple questions.)

Akim
6th March 2009, 11:19
i think the main problem is not the GM but the way this technology is controlled by a fews corporation. GM food in place like the third world would be a really good thing. Iran and some countries already developed GM food, allowing their people to get better harvest, and more food without using any chemical.

at the end, we should not blame the technology beccause some bad people use it the wrong way.

exacly! that was my point.

danyboy27
6th March 2009, 20:34
exacly! that was my point.

well, your point sounded like we should not use GM beccause the capitalist use it to exploit people. IMO, you dont stop yourself from using a hammer beccause capitalist use it.