So Donna think you just gave more substance from your follow-up on the synthetic life form to my feeling that they are not only creating franken food but now, lo and behold, FRANKENSTEIN'(S) themselves. Donna ya know the old saying "Money talks and bullchit walks?" I'm really believing it this time.

Klondike they really have made big strides in the FREAK dept. And look who is heading up this frankenstein experiments? Another person from melaland. I suppose they would like us to trust them to just try this on mice and rats. What will they do with these freaks of nature when they kill them to cut them open to see what the insides look like? Gonna add them to the melamine for addition to the pet food over here? GAWD, how horrid this all is.

db yes crossing the barrier and messing with mother nature's natural selection that has worked so well for so long. All these people need to get a life, find the solution to our energy needs, put all the brain matter to work on something needed all over, not on who will be the first to create Frankenstein from a petri dish.

Hey, JJ!

Are you trying to bait me with your money talks, bullchit walks statement?!?  You will surely get me on a tangent if I even dare to venture where I may want to!  And, then, that “Van with the X-ray vision” will surely be pulling up!

The notion of non-conceived and then birthed entities is a program I have been watching for a while and I will state, I am adamantly opposed to it.  However, not being in a seat in which anything can be done to put a halt to such production, as human beings we are put into a position of trepidation because we KNOW deep down inside, it is morally the wrong reason in which replication of "human beings" can, will or might be utilized. 

A couple notions of the scientific strides (if you can call them that) resounded within me as alerts.  They loudly reverberated the statement, "Danger, Will Robinson", and that is where my sense of foreboding comes into play. They are as follows:

1. The fact that those who would or may be slated for production are “living machines” – fully working organisms programmed for particular tasks."

and

2. Craig Venter's claiming monopoly ownership upon “free-living organism that can grow and replicate” "whose genome (full genetic information) has been built entirely through mechanical means"

In my opinion, when any organization has an interest in the identification, configuration, and/or splicing of DNA for the production of human genes for means of their own, we can rightfully conclude (at least I do) they may not be doing it in the best interest of science, as presented by the "invention" in a Patent, or as the inventors and interested parties may adamantly state.  Oh, sure, we can be hoodwinked into thinking this will produce germ/disease free, intelligent, though not conceived from conventionally accepted methods, entities, but then, I sit and wonder, whose entities will they be, or rightfully “belong to” without having been born from natural parents? 

For instance, Kyhal is born as a "free-living organism that can grow and replicate", but whose names are listed on Kyhal's birth certificate?  Or, for that matter, does Kyhal indeed exist and have a birth certificate?  If he does exist, how long will he remain alive if he does not produce the task he is/was "programmed for", if not for a disease-free population purpose?  But, then the question becomes, what is Kyhal "programmed" for?  Is it the everyday life lessons and necessities?  Will Kyhal feel or learn, and thereby replicate basic feelings and emotions?  Or, will Kyhal be so "programmed" he does not learn anything from his entry into the world, and thereby turn against what he sees in his environment, including any other person he may feel is one of the "programmed" threats, or the persons or family Kyhal can or may be sent to live with?

Now flip the scenario. 

Safely presume Kyhal was not “replicated” to produce a disease-free population, but for some other purpose known only to Kyhal’s “makers”.  What questions will be asked now?  We ARE intelligent, FREE-thinking beings and, having lived in the century of “secrets” and “closed doors”, we know what lurks in the machinations of some minds.  “Controlling” Kyhal would be tantamount to denying his autonomy and that of any subsequent “replications”, a characteristic we are endowed with at BIRTH.  If Kyhal is NOT a FREE-thinking entity, then what is he?  He becomes non-autonomous, and therefore does not think or control himself, as “someone” or “something” has done it for him, and that is where the “programming” becomes sketchy, in my opinion. 

This is where one does not want to wander the avenues of their own minds, as that only produces the notion that this idea of “living machines - fully working organisms programmed for particular tasks” and “free-living organism that can grow and replicate” could, can, may or will be used for “strategic” purposes (in my opinion).  The notion of “replicating” arsenals of Kyhal’s is by far a more precarious ideology, as the “programming” could, can, may or will consist of “kill and destroy” encoding and thereby produce a battalion of “automatons” (in my opinion).   Now, I sit and wonder, what happens if this group “replicates” solely on their own while their DNA evolves?  Who “controls” the entities now?  Surely, not those who “created” the entity for their purpose, rather it would be the MIND of the entity, which would hold control, a mind that has EVOLVED.  Now, take that one step further and ask, does the evolving mind of the replicated entity evolve within the violent realm as perhaps, “programmed”, or does that entity realize that the majority of humankind is basically peace loving and evolve into a benevolent "replicated" unit?  I will let you ponder that question, but I believe that any way I look at this, it presents a highly volatile set of circumstances.

Yes, I sit here shaking my head in awe at the audacity of this idea and I believe that is what the concerned scientists fear, as well.  If humankind uses this for THEIR benefit, then let it benefit for the good, such as medical purposes.  Let it not be to fabricate mice for experimental and/or warm-blooded food production, or to produce sheep, pigs, chickens or cows for food or pet consumption because some diseases within are antibiotic resistance.  Don't use this to "build" anything that would be contrary, rather, use this “knowledge” to sufficiently rid this planet of the diseases that plague so many, some of which have been “birthed” through food consumption and “in the name of science”.  However, in retrospect, this is not something I see happening (my opinion, only), especially in light of the volatility situation today, and certain interests present upon the Patent (see “Description”).

THE J. CRAIG VENTER INSTITUTE, 9704 MEDICAL CENTER DRIVE, Rockville, MD 20850
WO/2007/047148) MINIMAL BACTERIAL GENOME

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/fetch.jsp?DISP=25&IDB=0&SORT=1214293-KEY&LANG=ENG&LANGUAGE=ENG&SERVER_TYPE=19&FORM=SEP-0%2FHITNUM%2CB-ENG%2CDP%2CMC%2CPA%2CABSUM-ENG&IA=US2006039047&TOTAL=1&C=10&SEARCH_IA=US2006039047&START=1&QUERY=%28WO2007047148%29+&DBSELECT=PCT&TYPE_FIELD=256&RESULT=1&IDOC=1312194&DISPLAY=STATUS

The “Documents” section of the Patent filed with the World Intellectual Property Organization is worth viewing, if you are interested in the particulars of this “invention”.  Yes, a lot of it is scientific in nature, but there are very obvious read between the line implications, in my opinion.  Use the “page button” to view individual pages of these documents, as there is no scroll capacity and only Page 1 will be present for viewing.   

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/fetch.jsp?DISP=25&IDB=0&SORT=1214293-KEY&LANG=ENG&LANGUAGE=ENG&SERVER_TYPE=19&FORM=SEP-0%2FHITNUM%2CB-ENG%2CDP%2CMC%2CPA%2CABSUM-ENG&IA=US2006039047&TOTAL=1&C=10&SEARCH_IA=US2006039047&START=1&QUERY=%28WO2007047148%29+&DBSELECT=PCT&TYPE_FIELD=256&RESULT=1&IDOC=1312194&DISPLAY=DOCS

United States Patent Application, No. 0070122826, dated May 31, 2007

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220070122826%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20070122826&RS=DN/20070122826

So, in essence, what you suspected, JJ, regarding “FRANKENSTEIN(S)”, is truthful in its form as it appears on paper and in thought.  My statement, “X-Files, here we come”, appears not to be that far off base and only adds to my confirmation and trepidation of this whole affair: The horror NOW has the propensity to begin.

Sincerely,
Donna


~ The dead cannot cry out for justice; it is a duty of the living to do so for them. ~
    Lois McMaster Bujold, 2002 Diplomatic Immunity, US Science Fiction Author

Donna the 'replicants' that you mention made me stop dead and the memories of The Terminator movie and Aliens with Queenie large & in charge of her soldiers. Also we have Monsanto's terminator seeds too. Think there is any connection? Were the movies a glimpse as to what may come about? Not something I like to think about but just did. With all the messing around with the DNA of food I do not feel for one moment there would be any good created out of this. Good does not make money, does it? Nah rather evil, hurtful, dangerous, keep you sick things make money. Too many rich people out there who will throw their money at this in order to be a part of it, to control it along with the scientists-smacks of Nazi Germany where they told the scientists what kind of cruel experiments to do to those people. This is all just so shameful and un-humane in any way, shape or form. I'm sorry we are opening Pandora's Box wider and wider and we will have (all movies) Hellraiser, Aliens, Pumpkinhead, The Terminator replicants running around loose as mother nature is ass-backwards.

Donna

That statement says it all for me, 'enormous implications', the word enormous indicates massive, worldwide, all encompassing, whatever the up side it would be great (for those that could afford it), whatever the down side it would be absolute disaster for all of us.

IMO, the risk FAR outweighs the reward in this one.

I still believe that we as human beings, by definition, can not know more than the creator, evolution whichever you believe. We can not screw around with artificial life, synthetic beings, Way too many ethical questions here.

Does the artificial life form have a soul? is it aware of its existence? Will it be used in place of animals for drug/food testing. How do we as humans justify this? Would they be used as soldiers? LAB rats? What is this higher purpose that could justify this creation?

I don't understand how anyone, scientist or GOD fearing person could accept this.

If one believes in GOD, then this isn't right, GOD is the creator not us.

If one believes in evolution, scientists, then they must believe that it took billions of years to perfect the genome that they are now screwing around with.

I still can see no long term upside to these projects, maybe short term cures for diseases, but what about the long term effects? new diseases, synthetic life forms escaping and mating creating another form of life.

db

shibadiva

Sort of like burning the candle on both ends. Discovery and the resulting profit without the liability of that discovery and profit. That sounds like a ponzi scheme?

How do we hold them accountable for the inevitable consequences that will occur?

If history has taught us anything it is that any new invention comes with a caveat. That NOTHING IS 100% SAFE, there must always be a trial period to work out bugs, sometimes the inventions don't work at all, (thalidomide, vioxx, ford edsal, ford pinto, etc) after a short trial time frame.

db