Well bob, it appears you don't really have a clue as to how things work. In short, scientists operate at the behest of big business. If they can't make money off it, they squelch it. There are a lot of natural cures that they have prevented from reaching the market because the FDA in this country is in bed with the pharmecutical companies. Drugs are big business. Chemo-therapy is big money in this country...do you think for one minute that they're going to study to find a natural cure or locate the cause so it can be prevented? Heck no. They want to find a way to charge us for pumping tons of chemicals into us or get us to take something for the rest of our lives. Scientists are in it to make money for who they work for...which, as Steve has already pointed out, often runs condradictory to the public's best interests. I don't know how it goes where you are, but you obviously don't understand how this country functions.
-
Opinions - 2. Human Evolution
-
yay... conspiracy theorygod bless you for being the one who knows the thruth
-
Would it be possible for you to reply to a post you disagree with something other than a snotty remark? It really does nothing to make your case. Or is that the lesson you've gotten from the Sermon on the Mount? Are you intentionally trying to make fundamentalist Christians look ridiculous?For the third time, there is a difference between basic and applied science. Do I need to say it a fourth time? Does no one raises any issues that are worth addressing? Or would you prefer to just bulldoze ahead?Big business (much less small business) pays for very little basic research. Things like stem cell research are among basic biomedical research. It will take a while before its widely used therapeutically, but the long-term prospects look very good. Unfortunately, misguided fundamentalists are trying to put the brakes on progress the way the Christian church did for so many years in pre- and post-Renaissance Europe, and the way Islam did to the Arab world in the 1100's.On a completely different subject, there is a problem with rolling back all regulations on "natural" remedies: People will sell anything for money. They don't have to be big corporations; snake oil salesmen can be sole proprietors.As it is, so-called "nutritional supplements" are not regulated as drugs. There is no one to check the safety of their ingredients, to see if they contain adulterants or impurities, or to check whether they have the amount of active ingredient claimed on the label, much less whether or not they're at all effective for what they claim the are, or what kind of side effects they might have.It would be good if more natural remedies were put to scientific tests, but people are still willing to ingest questionable substances based on faith.You might be interested to know that the U.S. federal government funds research on alternative medicine through the NIH's National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine.I hope your conspiratorial mindset doesn't prevent your children from getting immunized. And believe it or not, while not the best imaginable therapy, chemotherapy and radiation are very effective for the treatment of certain types of cancer. If your child had the type of leukemia that is responsive to chemotherapy, what would you do? Give her shark cartilage?
-
I get called a conspiracy theorist and you start harping about this and that, yet you can't argue what I've said and attempt to mitigate it in some way. What I said concerning the pharmacutical companies is true, and you know it, Steve. Why can't you just admit it? You bring up this thing about applied vs basic science in the face of what you know is true...that the pharmacutical companies, by specifying the application, are driving basic science. So, your difference, which makes no difference, IS no difference. But you know that already, don't you.Now as far as "snottiness" goes, you're one of the worst offenders. Not passing judgement...just stating a fact and letting it speak for itself.
-
In reply to:
Well bob, it appears you don't really have a clue as to how things work.
Well Thor, I'm so glad that you do. I must be blinded by my own agenda or something...
In reply to:
In short, scientists operate at the behest of big business. If they can't make money off it, they squelch it.
In short, big businesses don't employ all scientists. Scientists are also funded by governments and universities. And what would a university have to gain from holding back a cure for cancer? Or what would a company like Sony have to gain from holding back the secret to free energy? With their recent battery disaster you'd think that they'd be more than happy to release it to regain their reputation.
In reply to:
I don't know how it goes where you are, but you obviously don't understand how this country functions.
Well I have to be honest with you, if America is how you say it is (to which everyone seems to disagree with you in everything I have ever read) then your FDA is responsible for genocide. How has the FDA gone so long without investigation from both national and international agencies?
And of course this is all based on the belief that an American company discovers these things. No matter how corrupt your system may be, the International community is far more open. Like the Irish company that believes it has found a source for free energy. As soon as they discovered and verified it, they announced it to the world! Whether it turns out to be the ultimate solution or not is beyond the point, because their reaction to the discovery is something that is expected of all major discoveries around the world.
You don't have a clue how the scientific community works and you are in no position to comment on it. All of your arguments are based on your beliefs, not on fact. You may have studied the Bible in great detail throughout your life, but it just doesn't apply to everything. Altho should I ever need a comprehensive study of the bible to find the true answer to how to program that little clock on my VCR, I'll give you a call.
(Oh, I use a DVD player, not a VCR. Damn scientific advancement...)
-
Why must you jump on Thor in every single thread??Isnt this topic looking for OPINIONS. Not Debate on STEVES OPINION.Good for you Thor.
-
> I get called a conspiracy theorist and you start harping about this and that
This and that, eh? So it's all just a bunch of junk, right? Only your points make any cogent sense, right? All those ideas that spring from your head and are never backed up (at least with functioning links). Thor, you keep shifting the subject and you refuse to address the questions posed. You really don't understand how science is funded in the United States (In another thread last year I went into that, with references, and I can dig it up if you still think that business is funding and doing a lot of basic research).
The drug companies are publicly-owned corporations. They will do what they think they make the most money doing, in the short-term, and maybe to a bit of a lesser extent, in the long-term. Collectively, the pharmaceutical industry is interested in having the government do whatever most benefits them, with the least regulation, as are all other industries. Unfortunately, we have a "conservative" president and lobbyist-loving congress that kowtow to industry to the extent possible. They've weakened the regulatory agencies. A big part of the solution is to kick those folks out of office, to the extent that the voting public cares (the last election indicates that they do; people who say that it doesn't matter who's in office have their heads up their ass).
(Here's the more important part...)
But corporations are focused on applied research. For the fourth time, do you understand the difference between basic research, the lion's share of which is funded by the federal government (and some of which is financed by private foundations), and applied research?
Almost all of stem cell research is basic biomedical research. So was research into the polio vaccine, before anyone attempted to make it a product. I suggest you look into the NIH database (as well as what foundations are financing) to see what's being researched.
Companies and people selling "natural" remedies have a lot of latitude. You can buy all the St. John's wort you like, and use it to treat whatever you want. No one is stopping you. But a company can't make medical claims for a product unless it has been shown that the product really has claimed benefits. The big pharmaceutical companies would run trials and sell it if it was in their own best financial interest; since they might not be able to get patent protection, they tend not to bother. But there are any number of other companies that could, but it appears that the companies that sell herbal preparations are more interested in short-term money and noisy and misleading marketing campaigns.
Meanwhile, the pharmaceutical companies manufacture many drugs that cure people and/or allow them to lead productive lives. There are a lot of people alive today, including many children, who owe their lives to the treatment they've gotten at hospitals and cancer centers. And as far as trauma care is concerned, I'm not sure what herbal remedies you think would be appropriate. A lot of technology that has saved a lot of lives is used in emergency rooms.
If you really are concerned that the pharmaceutical industry has too much political influence, I suggest that you vote.
_________________________
So, if you're interested in giving us brief platitudes on conspiracy theories rather than addressing the subject of this thread, would you like to describe your conspiracy ideas in more detail?
-
Pinkranger, since you haven't posted anything relevant to the thread, I'll assume you don't understand the subject under discussion. If you have any relevant questions pertaining to the subject, or what is under discussion, feel free to ask. I appreciate your framing your comments and question in a way that doesn't involve the use of four-letter words.Otherwise, it's better not to take the thread off on a tangent.
-
I don't think human will continue to evolve at any significant level. Evolution is calused by ther selection pressures of the envorment in which it lives. Humans have the ability to manipulate their envoroment, eg: we dont adapt to the cold because we can wear clothes and make shelter and fire.Because of abstract thought and the ability to mess with our enviroment, we do not need to evolve.Unless there is some giant climate change, I'm pretty sure there will be no more evolution, punctuated equalibrium theory and all that....
-
Bob said: " ...this is in fact a question of man's ability to initiate human evolution.... We are reaching a stage of technological and scientific knowledge that without the objections of certain religions and beliefs, we could purposely introduce our next stage of evolution. An example would be genetic engineering or the integration of the human body with technology." [emphasis added]This thread is not about natural selection and natural evolution. It's about human-initiated evolution, which could be taken to mean genetic manipulation, scientific and engineering prgress, artificial body parts, brain implants, etc.
-
I'm not sure if thats really true. I agree that here on Earth we can adapt almost any environment to suit our needs, but as humans venture into space and to other planets there are large differences, the most obvious being gravity. Currently our bodies our not adapted to Zero Gravity. Astronauts on the International Space Station have to do a lot of exercise every day to stop their muscles turning into mush. Should we ever find a solid planet with greater gravity than on Earth then our bodies will have to adapt to that. Currently we don't have the technology to adapt the gravity in an environment to suit our needs, so unless we can invent such a technology then we will have to evolve.
-
Hmmmm.....turns out I don't give a fuck
-
Well unless people spend ALOT of time in this supposed other planet, enough for many generations to be produced, the likely hood of a mutation occuring that would let us cope better with gravety is extreamly low.
-
Dude, I know you don't give a fuck, but he's not talking about natural evolution!
-
Im not a dude. And big woop. He may not be talking about it, but I am.
-
Firstly, a dude can be a girl; secondly, it's his thread; thirdly, talking about natural evolution adds nothing useful to a discussion of "artifical" evolution. Obviously natural selection is no help if conditions suddenly change drastically, unless you're a bacterium.When people migrated to colder climates, they didn't wait to evolve; they would have frozen to death. They instead used their brain and wore clothing. Even now, any human who tries to live naked outside in Oslo will freeze to death, yet Oslo is full of humans. That's the kind of "evolution" we're talking about.
-
When people migrated to colder climates, they didn't wait to evolve; they would have frozen to death. They instead used their brain and wore clothing. Even now, any human who tries to live naked outside in Oslo will freeze to death, yet Oslo is full of humans. That's the kind of "evolution" we're talking about. but didn't I say something like that? Jezze ur imposible Steve.And didn't the natural evolution of abstract thought caluse us to be able to do this bull crap artifical evolution your going on about?I'm not in the mood to argue with You Steve
-
I'm not in the mood to argue with You Steve That's good, because I have no idea what you're going on about.> nd didn't the natural evolution of abstract thought caluse us to be able to do this bull crap artifical evolution your going on about?Take it up with Bob. It's his thread and you're posting in it. If you don't like his subject, there are many other threads to play in.The natural evolution of intelligence is a given. The idea is, how to we use it to adapt? I'm sure you must get that by now.
-
I can tell you don't get it. I'm sure you also don't no what you're going on about as you're just rewording exactly what I have already said.
-
How can we possibly evolve when we're on a planet with heavy gravity? Oh, the humanity.
