GM Science...so God's creation isn't good enough?

[Honza]

I don't think anyone here even mentioned culling.

[SerpentSun]

Originally Posted by Honza

I don't think anyone here even mentioned culling.

I mentioned natural selection breeding out those with disadvantagous birth defects, but I guess that got misinterpreted as being supportive of a eugenics program. I really should avoid these debates about humans meddling with the forces of nature....

[intj123]

Post #29 has the literal word culling. Right above my response.

[Honza]

Originally Posted by intj123

Post #29 has the literal word culling. Right above my response.

So it has.....my apologies. But that is talking about Nature culling us because we cannot survive anymore. As opposed to people culling each other out of judgement.

[SerpentSun]

Originally Posted by intj123

Post #29 has the literal word culling. Right above my response.

Was it my post? I'm just automatically assuming it is, because I have a tendency to use "strong words". And everyone always gets offended when I mention bad genes and natural selection haha.

[intj123]

Originally Posted by SerpentSun

Was it my post? I'm just automatically assuming it is, because I have a tendency to use "strong words". And everyone always gets offended when I mention bad genes and natural selection haha.

No, it wasn't anyone's specific post really, it was the sum of them.

And to be honest, I once held the same belief. Until I found out I am mildly colorblind myself, lol. It's not a big deal though, I bought a medical grade lens that corrects it and I can pass the ishihara colorblind test now.

Also there have been some amazing people in history who would not have been able to contribute amazing things to humanity if they were bred out of existence. Like Beethoven, he became deaf.

A lot of times we come up with some amazingly creative ways to compensate for our deficiencies, like that blind kid who developed echolocation ability to see with sound. He's dead now though.

It just doesn't seem right to me for us to judge and decide a person's value based on genetics and superficial characteristics based on biased criteria. A genetically deficient person may end up contributing more value to humanity than a "superior genetic specimen", unlikely as it may seem.

I see both sides as valid though, I know you guys mean well, to keep humanity fit and in optimal shape. But also there is the flip side surprise where the inferior can become superior. You should watch the movie "Gataca", it's about the future society that discriminates based on genetics, and they take your blood test everyday at work and stuff, and only superior genetically engineered humans are at the top of the food chain. But the main character has a little adventure of cheating the system, and achieving his dreams.

[Honza]

Originally Posted by intj123

No, it wasn't anyone's specific post really, it was the sum of them.

I know you guys mean well, to keep humanity fit and in optimal shape.

I think you are reading our posts backwards.

[SerpentSun]

Originally Posted by intj123

No, it wasn't anyone's specific post really, it was the sum of them.

And to be honest, I once held the same belief. Until I found out I am mildly colorblind myself, lol. It's not a big deal though, I bought a medical grade lens that corrects it and I can pass the ishihara colorblind test now.

Also there have been some amazing people in history who would not have been able to contribute amazing things to humanity if they were bred out of existence. Like Beethoven, he became deaf.

A lot of times we come up with some amazingly creative ways to compensate for our deficiencies, like that blind kid who developed echolocation ability to see with sound. He's dead now though.

It just doesn't seem right to me for us to judge and decide a person's value based on genetics and superficial characteristics based on biased criteria. A genetically deficient person may end up contributing more value to humanity than a "superior genetic specimen", unlikely as it may seem.

I see both sides as valid though, I know you guys mean well, to keep humanity fit and in optimal shape. But also there is the flip side surprise where the inferior can become superior. You should watch the movie "Gataca", it's about the future society that discriminates based on genetics, and they take your blood test everyday at work and stuff, and only superior genetically engineered humans are at the top of the food chain. But the main character has a little adventure of cheating the system, and achieving his dreams.

I'm less concerned with keeping humanity fit than the ecosystem as a whole haha.

[intj123]

Originally Posted by SerpentSun

I'm less concerned with keeping humanity fit than the ecosystem as a whole haha.

Back when the world population was around 6.5 billion, it was said that we could fit the world population into Texas and still live comfortably.

I don't buy too much into the doom and gloom of humanity killing the world.
And even if it does, oh well, at least I enjoyed my youth.

I'm sure the world governments have their plans and projections for the future, so that we can live sustainably. So I don't worry about it too much anymore.

Plus they have a huge seed bank of all our natural plants stored somewhere, I forgot, but I think it was somewhere with a lot of snow of ice and desolate.
This is just in case all the genetically modified stuff goes haywire, they can restart natural life.

Hey I just saw a video on youtube, it said Japan has discovered a newly evolved bacteria that eats plastic and breaks it down into it's original substances which are environmentally friendly. See, there is nothing to worry about, nature sorts itself out I guess.