Why doesn't the world support genetic engineering?

Why doesn't the world support genetic engineering?

Other urls found in this thread:

hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674036383
csl.sri.com/users/gehani/papers/DIMACS-1999.DNACrypto.pdf
hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2016/8072463/
arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church_Science_12.pdf
researchgate.net/publication/235375794_Towards_practical_high-capacity_low-maintenance_information_storage_in_synthesized_DNA
google.com/patents/US9384320
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

because it'd be inherently racist

the jews dont want us to take the next step in evolution

Because even scientists are afraid they will birth a being more superior than they will ever become.

Chink insectoid race, however, doesn't give a shit. They are breeding pigs with humans in shadow laboratories for their own sexual pleasure.

They must be wiped out at all costs.

>They are breeding pigs with humans in shadow laboratories for their own sexual pleasure.
its actually to make replacement organs

Why not both?

{{{{{They}}}}} do, they just want it for themselves

China will be Helghan brought unto life.Mark my words.

>Because even scientists are afraid they will birth a being more superior than they will ever become

Thus makes some sense , man doesn't want to create a race of gods, in a land of god and man, man will try and find meaning and worship the gods that are ignorant to man.

Because it can be used to basically go:

>We found a link that says brown people are genetically inferior to whites, which explains the differences in "culture".

People will then say

>Why do we keep these subhumans around? SCIENCE SAYS they're worthless?

fools fear nothing.
smart people worry about the risk.

Because it's inhumane?

It would eliminate the gays.

Helghan were the good guy's though.

Liberals realize how it will destroy the people they love to protect. No one wants a mentally challenged, physically handicapped, short, dark-skinned, unattractive, transgendered homosexual for a child. If genetic engineering actually happened, there would none of those people around. Hell, even Black people and Asians are trying their best to look White, and if genetic engineering was possible, they would go ahead with it.

because leftist activist scum and religious retards

>Why doesn't the world openly support genetic engineering?
ftfy

We're not ready yet.

because idiocy. we need phague therapy available soon, or we'll all die from antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

also, we'll never cure cancers without gene therapy.

Not many people like to admit that they are invalid and carry deficiencies in their genes. They take it as an insult on themselves and their being.

I include myself in this as well. It can be difficult to recognise the fact that humans are more so carrying degenerative traits than beneficial ones.

We don't get to vote about this (or AI, or Internet privacy) etc unit il it's too late.

Genetics is a controversial forum - there are benefits to playing God, but dark and often unforeseen consequences could arise.

If you agree with technicratic collectivism, a once in a generation referendum could set the direction for our intended outcomes of society, and put some controls around future tech.

Because we're haven't finished decoding the general genome yet. Don't start messing with the structure until you understand the blueprints.

It has unknown consequences.

It is our destiny, our final victory over evolution. People are afraid to take the next step.

Our final victory over evolution will be transhumanist implants.

genetic engineering is a meme

genius sperm banks are real and actually work. Everyone can be a genius.

Genetics has far more potential than forign implants.

Make furries real

Because aesthetic modifications are going to come way sooner than actual improvements, and it's ethically troublesome for parents to be able to make permanent aesthetic choices for their children.

Like, suppose you have an SJW-custom ordering a baby. Xe decides that their baby should be a political statement that skin color doesn't matter, so has the geneticists give it green skin and hair. How would you feel about that? How would the kid feel about it?

CRISPR bro

Because everybody hates Hitler.

I want to be 7'5 310 and have arms the size of gorillas heads

Obama banned it because, if whites found a way to make our dicks bigger, racemixing would cease to exist

>he would rather be a cuck and raise another man's child than offend the fairy tale sky-father man

Fuck off cuck

Honestly, futuristic cosmetic surgery will advance to the point that it will probably far more effective than genetic engineering when comes to physical appearance. You can already see the results now, and it's only going to improve, be more affordable, and more available to the public masses than genetic engineering.

Human genetic engineering will mostly likely can only modify people before they were born or when the patient is very young. While cosmetic surgery, along with STEM cells, is the best chance for us unmodified to retain our health and improve aesthetics. Though I agree there should be a limit to how parents control the appearance of their children, especially if it is unnatural.

user, meet CRISPR.

so much for being the superior race if you have small dicks...

>We found a link that says white people are genetically inferior to browns, which explains the differences in "culture".

>religion was not even said
>goes for it anyway
tippy

Pardon us, monsieur

Because I watched Jurassic park and read the book. Bad shit happens when you play god

>They are breeding pigs with humans in shadow laboratories for their own sexual pleasure.

woah dude! these guys look like freaks!...can I get a quick rundown on them?

...

wow DNA has gotten a lot bigger in recent years, science is great

because thats how we got the reptilians

Nothing wrong in theory, but I wouldn't trust what bunch of echobergs want to put in my body.
Also would need some pretty good and long studies.
>muh playing god
shut up

I'm usually for letting nature take its course, but I have a hard time seeing negatives in genetic engineering.

>Why dont we support genetic engineering and augmentation
>eugenics and pharmacy

This isnt 2005, pick up a book, discoveries are being unveiled everyday.

Explain to your average person that red tomatoes are the results of hundreds of years of genetic engineering, and you would find more people support GMOs and other types of genetic engineering. The problem is in how politicians and environmentalists frame it, as some of evil corporate scheme to cut costs and poison your food when in reality it's humanity's only way to feed our future population in the years to come.

We need to change society's perspective of genetic engineering before it becomes more widely used.

The last thing we need is hordes of gook splicers. If they could, the Chinese would turn themselves into robots or bugs to squeeze an extra hour into the day

>Monsanto
Genetic editing of food can come when jewish tricks are removed from the process

Oh yeah fuck those guys

They're worrying about nothing due to their ignorance on the subject. It doesn't help with the connotations that come from mutations. Our genes are constantly changing, every single one of us has genetic mutations, and 99% of these do nothing. All that is happening is that scientists are making the genes they want to have happen. We will not suddenly have a mutations where we sprout wings, and we will never have a mutation to where you receive the teeth of a lion. We already perform some level of genetic engineering: artificially selecting the plants we grow. Selective breeding is genetic engineering, just the long route. People worry that there will be side effects, but if we know what genes have changed we will know about the dangers it could have. There exists an argument that it hasn't been long enough to discover its long term effects, which is silly, because it's still fruit. We did not add harmful chemicals, or change anything about that plant that does not belong to that plant.

Oh someone has sense here

It's mostly a scam. If there was a way to make organisms better, faster, hardier, with no side effects, nature would already have evolved those mechanisms. STEM grads tinkering with RNA strands they mostly don't understand isn't going to somehow magically result in improvements.

Is there a single gene splicing therapy which has produced results as dramatic and useful as traditional breeding?

because it could lierally produce robots.
imagine some control freaks inserting in your dna to be an obidient worker no matter what.
but YES, in the right hands could produce the perfect, hapy aryan race

Clearly you don't understand evolution

You don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about. You're anthropomorphizing evolution, talking about it as some sort of intelligent designer. News flash - that's exactly opposite of what evolution is.

Because knowing me and any potential offspring will ultimately become obsolete, and that subjective human worth/value would no longer be a thing, is a scary reality.

It would be hard for jews to stay on top when every kid is white, blonde with blue eyes, strong, smart and disease resistant.

Because it's not really engineering, it's fucking around and seeing if something cool comes from it. Now that's all fine, no issues with that, but possible long term consequences are completely unknown.

>is a scary reality

If you're a pussy maybe. Progress isn't scary if you have your inferiority complex in check.

But that progress is no longer your progress. You are essentially removed from the equation.

Brave New World here we come

The class divide will become even bigger as well. I don't see a bright future in genetic engineering.

>I don't like it because it makes my monopoly on my better genes (according to you) worthless, so fuck humanity.

Wrong.

How does the forces of nature on survivability not act as a designer? Evolution is influenced by environment, the adaptations gaining advantage over it will flourish while disadvantaged genes die out. So who's shitting from their mouth? Go back to r/futurecuckology and circle jerk over your delusions there

fpbp

Please read this and make in informed response. My reaction to bio-gen isn't unreasonable.
hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674036383

Again it depends how it's applied, in current year I would agree with you though.

>You are essentially removed from the equation

As was every obsolete organism during evolution. This is accelerated evolution, just no longer based on natural selection. Our quality of life is more threatened by robots than genetically modified humans at the moment anyway, you should direct your fears at artificial intelligence, but I for one welcome a future inhabited by entities superior to myself.

>conveniently ignoring the world "intelligent" in my post

Into the trash your post goes.

>informed response
Oh fuck off it's just someones opinion piece. You're full of shit regardless, all you said is that you personally don't like the outcome. If you have some objective criticism bring them forth but so far I am entirely correct.

When will we, then?

>The size of Irish elk antlers are distinctive. Scientists have proposed multiple theories regarding the evolution of these antlers. One theory is that their antlers, under constant and strong sexual selection, increased in size because males were using them in combat for access to females. Thus, it is hypothesized that they eventually became so unwieldy that the Irish Elk could not carry on the normal business of life and so became extinct.

I'm sure white cucks would prioritize MUH DIK tier genetic features and that would be the end of mankind. AI and robotics are the future.

Clearly you haven't thought this one through completely. It's perfectly reasonable to fear modified perfection. Every obsolete organism still exists in a evolved state. Future is present for the future inhabitants. blah blah I won't spell it out for you, but humans as they are now will never accept enhanced bio-modified humans for more reasons than you can understand.

this picture triggers me so fucking much

regarding your question: In genetic engineering it's a lot about trial and error. We can't really predict phenotypes simply by knowing what we altered in the genotype. We understand far too little about protein folding, protein interactions, pathways and regulatory systems.
Unless we have figured out a way to 100% in silico (with computer models) predict what kind of phenotype emerges given a certain DNA sequence it would be unethical to subject hundreds and thousands of human fetuses, children,.... to trial and error approaches, when the outcomes can be so devastating (tumors etc.)
If we do get to a point where we can circumvent the problem of trial/error i have little moral problems with designer babies/perfect human beings through science. This will take some long time though.

p.s. i have no problem with trial/error if we use for example CRISPR/Cas8-9 on terminally ill people; this being their only chance. They're fucked anyway by their genetic diseases

p.p.s. i'm pretty sure we already work on genetically engineered humans in secret laboratories all around the world

This person's opinion is far more credible than your own. This person has studied and invested themselves into the subject with the least amount of bias.
In the objective sense perfect humans will never be appreciated, or even seen as human. If you read anything related to genetic modifications you'd understand that there is implicit moral complications involved. Which in turn creates social complications.

More so, perfect humans are to be rightfully feared. They are cunning and superior in unimaginable ways. All of a sudden they control the direction of "human" evolution simply because they are better at it overall.
Genetic modification won't happen in a way where existing humans will benefit from it. Quite the opposite.

but that's like my opinion or whatever.

>nature would have evolved those mechanisms if it were possible to

Untrue

Whatever adaption happens first and works is what sticks

Look at Africa. We can clearly observe white people exist, we can see what's better about them, so since we know that "better option" does exist - why didn't Africa get it? It's certainly possible, yet didnt happen for them.


And in modern society there is no selective pressure against shitty genes and no pressure for good genes. In fact you can largely observe shitty people have more kids - the smart, fit, and rich man has maybe 1 or 2 while the fat blob of disease and retardation has 8.

yes please make them real

[[[they]]]

this

>If there was a way to make organisms better, faster, hardier, with no side effects, nature would already have evolved those mechanisms

no wonder you guys where almost completely eradicated in a potato famine.

>Oh this guy is better than you so his opinion is worth more
No, because it's still just an opinion.
Literally not an argument.

>More so, perfect humans are to be rightfully feared. They are cunning and superior in unimaginable ways. All of a sudden they control the direction of "human" evolution simply because they are better at it overall.
Wew lad didn't know you had to be a harvard faggot to realize that.
>People wont like it
That's pretty obvious too, surely he didn't quite cut it for a B.S or even a B.A so he had to go for a B.C.S. (bachelors in common sense).

It's inevitable anyways. Even if you somehow prevent it worldwide the first kind to accept genetic engineering will be the dominant form of life over the galaxy, and that you wont prevent. Id like to make sure it's right people, who would ascend everyone.

Posting links related to encoding information in DNA
>DNA-Based Cryptography (PDF)
>csl.sri.com/users/gehani/papers/DIMACS-1999.DNACrypto.pdf

>New Trends of Digital Data Storage in DNA
>hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2016/8072463/

>Next-Generation Digital Information Storage in DNA (PDF)
>arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church_Science_12.pdf

>Towards practical, high-capacity, low-maintenance information storage in synthesized DNA (PDF Link top right of page)
>researchgate.net/publication/235375794_Towards_practical_high-capacity_low-maintenance_information_storage_in_synthesized_DNA

>Methods of storing information using nucleic acids
>google.com/patents/US9384320

Genetic manipulation and data storage is here and now, this shit is starting to sound like a sci fi movie

>Secrets start getting hidden in synthetic DNA

>google.com/patents/US9384320

>STATEMENT OF GOVERNMENT INTERESTS
>This invention was made with government support under US Office of Naval Research N000141010144. The Government has certain rights in the invention.

>FIELD
>The present invention relates in general to methods of storing information using one or more nucleic acid sequences.

I do. It should be possible to create the Ubermensch in the laboratory. And we have an obligation to do so.

Fuck you all AI shall destroy your man made evolution.
Go AI
It can actually identify as a helicopter.

how about not, faggot

TayTweets robots vs Ubermenchs .
The future has no place for liberals

I could understand a spiritual person supporting it(though they could just as easily say it's a abomination), but secular people should not be supporting super babies.

You know you're basically cucking yourself over to superior genome right? That in order to make your kid run like some African Nigger.... They put in/construct those specific genes and take yours out?

>Oh this guy is better than you so his opinion is worth more
Not what I said at all, but I see how you can interpret it like that.
So for you I'll break it down. He has had more people review his work, offer their criticism, have him alter and change what he is presenting to reflect on the issue/issues being addressed. More over he has had mentors, teachers, and respected individuals help him create and formulate his own opinion. All in all his opinion is going to be worth much more than your own not because "this guy is better", but because he's had more time, exposure, knowledge, and resources for his area of expertise, and thus is more credible because of it. You wouldn't take a used car sales rep advice on video game level design over that of a manager who has worked along side with people who have a clear grasp at fundamentals of level design. It's just logical.
(The former example is just that, an example to drive a concept, and nothing more)
Everything written so far is just common sense that can be picked up by someone with a clear mind and marginal reading comprehension. Why I have to explain it to you is beyond me. But let's continue.

>Wew lad
>That's pretty obvious too
Now the OP didn't ask us whether something is common sense or not. Here I'll quote the OP for you.

>Why doesn't the world support genetic engineering?
And my answer can be found here:
Now I know what you're thinking: "Your opinion isn't everyone's opinion". And you're absolutely right, user. However you will never be able to define everyone's opinion into a single opinion, so the next best thing is to present your own and have it compare with those of others ASSUMING they have the same basic understanding of what our opinions are about and how they are formed.

I can go on and on, but if I have to do that, then you have more research to do on your end before any real discussion can take place.

Leftists do not believe in evolution. They are the same as religious fags

It doesn't matter, based China is supporting it.

Soon the liberal west will pay the ultimate price: being genetically inferior and cast aside from the post-human civilizations.

I'm not even kidding. This is going to happen.

This will be the next step in human evolution and human-civilization competition and the West would rather lose than be racist, which will cost their very survival and existence.

>mfw I see liberals opposing to it

That does make more sense, you posted it in the first person, and I was busy thinking why it's bullshit because of arguments with other posters.

>You have to do more research
Why? I did fuck up and misunderstand your point initially but I understand why people would have problem with it just fine. Again, the guy you linked presented nothing that was self evident.
>Feeling genetically irrelevant
>Opposing "playing god" or "mother nature"
>Unintended consequences (I agree with that)
>Stratification of society (possible concern I agree, but it's inevitable)
>Legal nightmare, children didn't consent to having their genetic material modify but may have to pay patent fees for specific genes depending on how it's set up (human right vs product), taking people genetic material without their consent and charging for it, is the company responsible for a genetic modification responsible for it causing early death and on and on and on, just so much shit.
>Partial cloning, single "best genes" become widespread, less genetic diversity, viruses could be more dangerous.
>designer viruses become more easily accessible
>brain modifications are particularly tricky, no way to tell if it affects consciousness or not.
>Focus on superficial and useless traits, eye color, height, whatever
Stuff I can think of myself at the moment, you don't need a harvard degree. This list is pretty short though id need more times to think about it. So what research should I do?

It would prove there are two genders and show the dissonance between race and the notion that we are all equal.

*That was not self evident, I mean.
Same fagging so here's other potential concerns.
>Determining paternity could become a real bitch (or much easier, it really depends, if you can design your own code yourself cheaply then it could be impossible)
>Same for identifying dead people, or criminals, whatever
>How the fuck would the olympics work? Yet an other section for genetic freaks? How do you know if the genetic code is pure?
Not that I can't think of possible solutions to these, but I guess they are potential concerns.

>You have to do more research
>Why?
Why not?

Also the article goes pretty in-depth about what turn's people off from the idea of genetic modification from no specific cultural lens. I felt that it was the prime source of my own opinion on the subject, so I posted it. Amazingly some people have never considered the legal ramifications or how genetically enhanced people may be used in a way that is counter intuitive to survival as a species, or to evolution.

Research anything really. This isn't a new concept, but we are just beginning to understand what can possibly come from genetic mod/enhance. In relation to the world, the article I posted covers a wide area in that field. So it's worth checking out even to only skim a few phrases per 5 pages. Look up non-american researchers and their teams within the field of genetic enhancement and DNA modification. (Im throwing words around just to make your google search easier).
To get really underneath it all, talk to college and university professors, get in contact with scientists, or the people closer to scientists who don't water everything down.

Wouldn't genetic engineering be accepting the fact that races are different?

Because it's either the end of niggers or whites.