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

[MARDAV70]

A few comments from "scientific" people here has brought me to contemplate a couple things concerning nature and evolution.
My mom and dad used have miniature Dachsunds. The female got pregnant and had two puppies. One puppy she kept pushing out away from her while the other she licked and, of course, nursed. We couldn't figure out what she had against this puppy... had to keep putting the rejected puppy back with mamma and she finally reluctantly allowed it to nurse. She was a sweet and good dog, and we were stumped. Not long after, we discovered the puppy was deaf. We realized that mamma was doing this to keep the genes of whatever caused this puppy's deafness out of the gene pool. Mamma knew something was wrong and the puppy had an imperfection that serves no good purpose, and better to end the poor puppy's life rather to allow that defect to continue. Is this just or cruel?
Is it humane or cruel for humans to find cures for illnesses and afflictions that allows those affected to live and reproduce, allowing imperfections to remain in the gene pool? I know this sounds cruel and heartless of me to ask such a question, but I'm asking only in the view of biological purity in the process of evolution.

In regards to GMOs I've read that "disease resistant" super crops have only caused the evolution of super diseases, and antibiotics have caused the evolution of super viruses. Is this true or not? I don't personally know about the crop aspect, but I do know when I used to get the flu, it lasted a maximum of four days. I never did any more than restrict myself to fluids and stay away from dairy products. In the last 20 or so years when I get the flu it lingers for weeks, and none of my previous self treatments that worked before worked. (For the past 10 or so years I've been taking vitamin D3 regularly and even though exposed to others with the flu have so far not gotten it since taking it. Just my imaginations...just a coincidence?) So, from where I sit and have observed, I wonder where is the good in all this GMO stuff? Nature knows what it's doing. Perhaps her only error is the product of the human being, that has brought about a planet that's dying, yet we're oh-so-smart in changing things to accommodate our imperfect species. Would the world have the problems (pollution, horrendous new diseases) it has today if humans had never developed in the evolution chain? I very seriously doubt it.

Lol...to quote cartoonist Al Capp, "We've seen the enemy. It is us".

Human arrogance knows no bounds. Nature will indeed strike back. She is.
How long d'you think humanity has got?

....

[MARDAV70]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

Human arrogance knows no bounds. Nature will indeed strike back. She is.
How long d'you think humanity has got?

....

What you've said resonates well with me, Lorelyen.

I don't think humanity will end. What I've wondered (and hope) will happen is that the human species will finally wake up. Maybe things will get a lot worse before "we" do wake up. Maybe this is a natural progression that's happened countless times on other planets, perhaps even in other dimensions. To wake up, be sorry and weep for past transgressions against the wonderful life forms that share our planet, and as a result to make sure we as a species change to fully appreciate them. I think only then will we come to fully understand spirituality. The growing popularity of sustainable living, rejecting of materialism and true concern for the planet and fellow human are pretty good signs, though.
What do you think?

[Honza]

Originally Posted by Busby

Now you want us to believe that nature doesn't need help.

I thought I was saying that Nature does need help.....

[Busby]

Originally Posted by Honza

I thought I was saying that Nature does need help.....

Well, if you were saying that you sure fooled me.

We have two choices with evolution and the genetics that goes with it. They are, after all, the same thing.

Either evolution is blind - that is it has no goal, or, it knows what it's doing and how things stand today is what it had planned up until now.

Should the first be true and evolution is blind, only creating new things by chance, then right at the end (of whatever) it's all pointless and if anything remains or doesn't remain - so what.

If it has a goal, and here we would need to pull our socks up, then everything is part of the plan anyway - all we have to do is wait until it's all sorted.

As a believer in evolution being blind (although he wouldn't put it that way), Richard Dawkins points out that qualities, morals, standards and attributes have values. These values although 'man made' are required for society to exist.

In a 'planned' evolution these values would maybe be 'built in' or would be there in seed form in order to expand. Planned evolution surely would not just concern itself with getting better physical conditions but would branch off into getting better information about that which is all around us. This seems to me to be the case. We are slowly appreciating that we live in an information world - one in which our minds fit nicely.

You also say that animals are subject to natural selection. Why just animals? Everything develops. Whether you think it's planned or not nature will change the cut of its clothes depending upon the cloth. Free will presumably playing a big part.

It now can be seen, in genetics, that the everyday environment can significantly effect genes - genes aren't made of concrete.

[Honza]

What I was saying was if we don't genetically modify ourselves then our gene pool will self destruct. It will do this because we have learnt to beat the natural selection process with medicine, heating, housing etc.

For example our eyes will become worse over the years because we don't need perfect vision to survive any more. So people with poor eyesight survive and reproduce and hence eyesight slowly gets worse.

This applies to most of our genes. Hence we need to sharpen them up a bit by engineering in order to stay healthy and fit.

[SerpentSun]

There is no "beating" natural selection. Genetic modification won't save us from mutation, it IS mutation. What we need is a bottle-necking event to wipe out the bad genes. Then we won't "need" to engineer crops with bigger yields, because a healthy ecosystem provides enough food for a healthy human population. And we are not healthy.

When I speak of the old days, I speak of the Paleolithic. Not Biblical times or the Middle Ages. Our population was smaller back then, but it was healthier. Bad genes were bred out and tribes were too far apart to spread disease. The whole planet was healthier too.

Humans are taking over Earth like a virus. We kill every species in our path, are making the planet sick, and nature's grand immune system is fighting back. You're blind if you don't see that. I swear, people will use any excuse to justify an anthropocentric mindset. Even saying that everything manmade is natural just because humans are a part of nature.

So are viruses. But like viruses, humans can't live without a host. If Earth dies, so do we. But Earth was here long before us and will be long after we go extinct. A bunch of apes can't beat the system, we're just too arrogant to see that our artificial selection has only negative effects. We turned wolves into pugs for Christ's sake. But natural selection always wins

[Earth Healer]

Originally Posted by Honza

Animals are subject to NATURAL SELECTION. Hence only the strongest and fittest survive.

That's not quite accurate. The most successful adaptation survives. Humans have the ability to manipulate their environment for better or worse and in doing so defy natural selection. Take away that ability and the traits with the most chance for successful survival in a natural environment will become dominant.

But human traits are not at issue with GMO's. Genetically modifying our food source has multiple effects, among which are soil depletion/degradation, and the destruction of the biodiversity so necessary for life on this planet, to name just a couple of biggies.

From a purely theological perspective, which is where I think this thread started, it seems to me that genetically modifying any organism could be construed as man attempting to be God. One might re-read the account of man trying to build a tower to heaven as a warning against that kind of arrogance.

[Khalli]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

Human arrogance knows no bounds. Nature will indeed strike back. She is.
How long d'you think humanity has got?

....

The planet already sent out a cry for help and it has been answered.
Healing is being done. The vibrational frequency of it is rising and a culling of the species might be necessary, just too many to sustain.

[intj123]

This talk of culling and ridding of bad genes kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Most of what you guys are talking about already happened.

I'm sure there is a workable solution for health and happiness for all without having to do what hitler, USA, and Britain did during world wars, performing eugenics experiments and culling the ones judged and deemed unfit for society.

If you look at the marriage and reproduction rates of our society based on education, you can see that there has been a sharp drop in high school level educated people, these people are being culled through financial means already.

But back to the main topic, yes GMO is bad, it reduces your libido and sexual virility for sure, probably many more problems like digestive problems too, I think it gave me IBS. This too I believe is another method of culling, all the cheap foods are GMO and consumed by the people who make little money, like those high school level educated people who have been seeing sharp drops in marriage and reproduction......And I've personally eaten those GMO foods for a nice little period during my life, I became my own test subject, and yes it messes with your sexual function, and they have done research on it and they said the exact same thing. I have a pretty strong sex drive so I noticed right away that my libido was being messed with by the GMO.


It's kind of funny, I wonder, if the people here who posted in favor of culling would support war.
War is also a method of culling, kills off the most aggressive stupid people in our society and we keep becoming more docile and peaceful from the weaker and more intelligent ones breeding I guess.
They say millennial generation has a much weaker grip strength than previous generations.

I don't believe that we don't have enough to go around. That is a belief the system has programmed us with, it's 1st world selfishness thinking.
Even china has now raised their child policy to 2 children, from the 1 they had before.
If it's the law to only have 1 child, it seems very effective at controlling population, because 2 people make 1 child, so obviously there will be a reduction in population by about half in only 1 generation.
Things are not as hopeless as they seem, I know that where there is a will there is a way.