Scientists have blood on their hands.

Just Arrived Joined: Nov 18, 2006 Posts: 8

Why do the worlds scientists keep providing nuclear weapons to every dictator in the world who is ordering them?

It can't be because of religon, because ST. Dicky Dawkins tells us most scientists are atheists!

So it must be for money, power, or other greedy, selfish, short sited reasons.

I guess they aren't really that smart, are they?

If they are that wrong about politics, maybe they are wrong about God.

In fact, maybe they are LYING to us!

Thinker Joined: Nov 12, 2006 Posts: 423

TROLL ALERT!!!!!

The Learned Joined: Jun 08, 2006 Posts: 104

Heh.. thats cute.

Resident Joined: Oct 13, 2005 Posts: 360 Location: USA

Ban the troll for absurd argumentation.

Posted: Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:08 am

Stauffenberg wrote:

Why do the worlds scientists keep providing nuclear weapons to every dictator in the world who is ordering them?

It can't be because of religon, because ST. Dicky Dawkins tells us most scientists are atheists!

So it must be for money, power, or other greedy, selfish, short sited reasons.

I guess they aren't really that smart, are they?

If they are that wrong about politics, maybe they are wrong about God.

In fact, maybe they are LYING to us!

thats adorable . Do you go to work with that brain?

Intern Joined: Feb 02, 2006 Posts: 205

Moloth wrote:

Stauffenberg wrote:

Why do the worlds scientists keep providing nuclear weapons to every dictator in the world who is ordering them?

It can't be because of religon, because ST. Dicky Dawkins tells us most scientists are atheists!

So it must be for money, power, or other greedy, selfish, short sited reasons.

I guess they aren't really that smart, are they?

If they are that wrong about politics, maybe they are wrong about God.

In fact, maybe they are LYING to us!

thats adorable . Do you go to work with that brain?

Someone who responds with a comment like "Do you go to work with that brain" is someone who does'nt even use one. This poster is on to something.

Ok..... God is a leap of faith, that's it, but it seems a rather harmless concept compared to some of the projects being undertaken in the name of science. In the future it is most likely you find more experiements of concern.

Here are a few activities being planned in US academic labs.
1. tweaking anthrax toxin to render experimental drugs ineffective.
2. Turning a harmless rodent virus into a deadly pathogen
3. Enhancing the potency of botulinum toxins (Already the most lethal posions known)
4. transferring genes that help viruses evade the human immune system from one pathogen to another.

The motivations can be debated and the reasons can be argued good or bad, however it has nothing to do with some conspiracy about God, but none the less Science can and will in the future become a threat to the existance of humanity, and more so than the concept of god.

Graduate Thinker Joined: May 18, 2006 Posts: 777

What reality are you from?

Posted: Sun Dec 03, 2006 5:58 am

Moloth wrote:

Stauffenberg wrote:

Why do the worlds scientists keep providing nuclear weapons to every dictator in the world who is ordering them?

It can't be because of religon, because ST. Dicky Dawkins tells us most scientists are atheists!

So it must be for money, power, or other greedy, selfish, short sited reasons.

I guess they aren't really that smart, are they?

If they are that wrong about politics, maybe they are wrong about God.

In fact, maybe they are LYING to us!

thats adorable . Do you go to work with that brain?

Right...and "scientists" are "providing nuclear weapons to every dictator in the world who is ordering them". That's equivelant to saying Blaise Pascal is providing computers to every potential hacker in the world who wants one.

Madoba wrote:

Someone who responds with a comment like "Do you go to work with that brain" is someone who does'nt even use one.

Or the original post could have been so asinine that it only warranted a sarcastic, light-hearted response. Maybe?

Quote:

This poster is on to something.

I sort of giggled to myself when I read this. Here we go...

Quote:

Ok..... God is a leap of faith, that's it,

Exactly.

Quote:

but it seems a rather harmless concept compared to some of the projects being undertaken in the name of science.

It SEEMS that way. Has it proven to be that way? Ask the families of the victims of 9/11. Salem Witch Hunts, the Crusades, modern day middle-eastern conflict over "Zionists", etc, etc. The laundry list goes on and on. So anything after this point will be one-sided and subjective, I assume?

Quote:

In the future it is most likely you find more experiements of concern.

Here are a few activities being planned in US academic labs.
1. tweaking anthrax toxin to render experimental drugs ineffective.
2. Turning a harmless rodent virus into a deadly pathogen
3. Enhancing the potency of botulinum toxins (Already the most lethal posions known)
4. transferring genes that help viruses evade the human immune system from one pathogen to another.

Side note: I should point out that much of this technology is from evolutionary biology, lol. Just an interesting fun-fact for those that don't "believe" in evolution.

Quote:

The motivations can be debated and the reasons can be argued good or bad, however it has nothing to do with some conspiracy about God, but none the less Science can and will in the future become a threat to the existance of humanity,

Science doesn't kill people; People kill people. Wink

Quote:

and more so than the concept of god.

See above. Crusade, anyone?

Intern Joined: Feb 02, 2006 Posts: 205

Mr. C, I'm not talking of ancient crusades I am talking of the future. I am someone who dismissed this guys Scientist God conspiracy, but did'nt completely dismiss the topic. I brought up the idea that right now and especially in the future, the God concept will be harmless compared to the misapplications of Science.

For example, Global warming, if the dire consequences are to be accepted, it was'nt religion that invented electricty and Coal plants and the automobile.

What inventions and ideas discovered through science will be the next problem that pushes the world to collapse. Is it computers? Could it be nanobots?

I listed 4 projects that seem quite alarming and will be undertaken by scientists. It wasn't God that recieved the funding from the departmet of health and human services. It's not Reglions that are planning on tweaking the anthrax toxin to make it resistant to drugs. Again I'm talking of the idea that right now and especially in the furture, the God concept will be harmless compared the the potential misapplications of science.

How is science becoming more dangerous than God.
1. Some application derived from sicence may doom us. (example human causes of global warming)
2. It will give anybody, religous or not, atheist or not the means to wipe out humanity.

I'm not arguing against science. I support it and realize that these risks may be just the way it is, but the God concept is surely less risky, from my point of view a harmless product of human evolution.

The fact that science is much more dangerous than god is to me progress and that the god concept has been left way behind to a bygone era. I'm not advocating a choice. Science is the only choice.

However This leads me to conclude that in the future more death descruction and problems will be caused by humanities application of science, than ever happened in the crusades. Yes Mr. C, I said the crusades.

Again science is much more risky than the concept of god.

The Learned Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 110

madoba wrote:

How is science becoming more dangerous than God.
1. Some application derived from sicence may doom us. (example human causes of global warming)
2. It will give anybody, religous or not, atheist or not the means to wipe out humanity.

Again science is much more risky than the concept of god.

It makes as much sense to blame fossil fuels themselves (coal and oil, etc.) as to blame science for global warming, and to blame the atom as to blame scientists for nuclear proliferation. Science is not risky. People are risky. And people are driven to do ill by religious and irrational ideas and not scientific ideas. The original post was simply stupid--the same old b.s. that goes along with the "Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot were atheists" arguments.

Posted: Sun Dec 03, 2006 10:47 am

Did you know there is also research on the chemical interaction "communicaton" between bacteria that may show us how to interupt the growth of most if not all pathogens including viruses.

genetically modifying harmless viruses to make them deadly pathogens to cancer cells?

extreme botox? might be a hit with the geriactric set

"transferring genes that help viruses evade the human immune system from one pathogen to another" may help us understand the mechanism by which those pathogens evade the imune system and could lead to cures for such pathogens.

So you really seriously think that science and knowledge is more dangerous than ignorance and superstition?. Consider life in the middle ages, also called the dark ages and for good reason. Life expectency was less than 40 years. more than a third of all women died in childbirth. most people hed 10 to 12 kids so that maybe one or two of them would live long enough to have kids themselves. and populations grew slowly!! Think about that , everybody having kids by the dozen and little to no population growth. Life was hard brutal and short back then. The xian church kept it that way for a thousand years!!! If you had any ideas that may not agree with church dogma the church would send some of its friends with clubs knives and red hot pokers to make sure your ideas didn't spread. From the time of the burning of the library at Alexandria to the invention of Gutenbergs press the churches stranglehold on western civilization put a stop to scientific progress, there was none ,nada, zip,zilch people in the forteenth century lived (and died) pretty much the way they did in the fourth century. This is the crime commited by the church. In comparison the crusades, witchhunts and occasional auto de fe seem too trivial to mention. I wonder how much misery would have been prevented had there been no church. In the early centurys the arabs were beginning to build a science and mathmatics based on what the greeks had learned but it seems that Islam put the kibosh on that

Just a thought : If Ignorance and religion are safer than science and knowledge then where are the Neanderthal?

Graduate Thinker Joined: Jan 12, 2005 Posts: 502

Hey Madoba,

I'll Bite. You seem like a genuine fellow who has a position and would like to discuss it. At first, your tack was a bit hostile, but I can see where you are coming from. I once held a similar viewpoint as you, even AS an Atheist Smile

Heck, even Carl Sagan himself was rather pessimistic about humanities survival. Many a time he mentioned how, even though we are a remarkable species, we are probably doomed to destroy ourselves. The roots of this, however, lie not in religion, science, or any other "tool" we have created. The cause of the ills which threaten our survival are simply ignorance, arrogance, and good ol' selfishness.

People who want to achieve things, weather good or bad, do so through whatever means they can. Einestine himself wrote a letter petitioning the US govt. not to use atomic energy for destructive ends, the story is apocryphal but still poignant in its naivety. The point is, just because Atomic energy is a discovered fact, makes no one culpable for how this fact is used.

Knowledge about Anthrax can allow people to BOTH create vaccines, and to weaponize the bacterium. Gunpowder made pretty fireworks first, but it wasn't long till folks learned to kill each other with it. I imagine in the days of the caveman, the development of the stone handaxe brought both food, and tribal bloodshed.

The way you have framed the issue thus far is too simplistic, the problem isn't science or religion, it's people and their pettiness.

Now. Religion v. Science is another issue all together. The argument you should really be discussing is "Knowledge v. Ignorance, Which brings more suffering?" After you have the answer, you can examine Religion v. Science in the way of which one conforms to the previous conclusion.

After examining this issue myself, I have come to the conclusion that Knowledge ultimately brings more good than harm. And science brings much more knowledge than religion ever has.

Posted: Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:19 pm

My two bits....... I have always thought that man will always abuse that which is good.

Look at the computer for instance. Hardly have we the internet, and such a fantastic way of communicating, that we have hackers, viruses etc...

People will always abuse that which is meant for the good of society.

It's a human trait, and no matter how clever we are in discovering, inventing, producing, man will always abuse it.

With each progress, we can cancel it out with using it as a destructive progress.

Like was mentioned earlier, with the cave man and his axe. It was used for the good and the bad. As long as man cannot live in peace with each other, there will always be ways to destroy him.

Having said that, we are still ahead I think, of making good with science.

I know this started looking like a "troll" post, but it was I thought, an interesting thought just the same. As I have been there at times myself.

Intern Joined: Feb 02, 2006 Posts: 205

Quote:

So you really seriously think that science and knowledge is more dangerous than ignorance and superstition?. Consider life in the middle ages, also called the dark ages and for good reason.

Stop Rejak! I am looking forward not backwards. I have no response to those aruguments. You are quite right about life in the middle ages, but Society is past that, How else explain the proliferation of science.

Yaro you hit it on the head, and I like your analogy of religion and science as tools. In my case I was using the god concept as religion. All I'm saying is look ahead 100 years into the future, what tool will be more threatening to humanity? Religion or Science?

Religion and science can both be a positive influence on humanity, but boy do they both have a dark side, and Fortunatley religions dark side is mainly in the past but science is just begining.

I suspect in the future the authorities will use science in the same way they used the crusades, for power, control, and the destruction of people and ideas that are offensive.

Again I'm not arguing for any other path but science.

Thinker Joined: Nov 12, 2006 Posts: 423

madoba wrote:

Someone who responds with a comment like "Do you go to work with that brain" is someone who does'nt even use one. This poster is on to something.

Ok..... God is a leap of faith, that's it, but it seems a rather harmless concept compared to some of the projects being undertaken in the name of science. In the future it is most likely you find more experiements of concern.

Here are a few activities being planned in US academic labs.
1. tweaking anthrax toxin to render experimental drugs ineffective.
2. Turning a harmless rodent virus into a deadly pathogen
3. Enhancing the potency of botulinum toxins (Already the most lethal posions known)
4. transferring genes that help viruses evade the human immune system from one pathogen to another.

The motivations can be debated and the reasons can be argued good or bad, however it has nothing to do with some conspiracy about God, but none the less Science can and will in the future become a threat to the existance of humanity, and more so than the concept of god.

http://www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm


Create an account	Home · Articles · Downloads · Video Library · Forums · Chat Room · aStore