Japanese take the piss out of science

[Pressure Drop]

Uh oh, the fatty is showing how stupid he is once again.

1. What kind of animals have we altered the genes on?
Belgian blue, the fat cow that gets so fucking big that it almost isn't able to stand.
A featherless chicken, from quite a few years ago.
Taken embryos or something from animals and inserted it in another one, so it gives birth to a normal animal.

2. Plants
We've altered the genes and such in plants, so they can endure harsh climate, last longer, taste better, grow bigger. I'm sure you've seen the ugly gigant strawberries from USA? Yes, its gene manipulated you stupid fat american nerd.

About Belgian Blue, we've altered the genes to those animals, but i think there was something with them in the first place. (Those animals aren't forbidden in some countries for no reason).

The gene that makes the human talk? It's in the brain you fucktard. And we already know which hormone who makes the human grow, we get pills to grow/stop growing (only for people who seriously need it), so it won't be hard to take that knowledge over to animals.

Next time, get things right when you correct someone you ugly pathetic nerd looking for attention.
(I was about to post the ugly picture of your fatass, but I've done it countless of times, and your ugly face is obnoxious).

Gg once again fatty, making a fool out of yourself must be your favorite trick.

hmmm i think your understanding of genes isn't entirely accurate.

There can be more than one gene incontrol of the same thing which is why in things like human height there is quite a range. There can be defects most notably a tumor in the gland responsible for production of human growth hormone. But that isn't really genes per se.

Rather than finding all these genes it is much easier to just artificaly breed those that allready display the large genes etc.. we have been doing that for thousands of years with crops,livestock and dogs. One of the reasons many of them are very prone to inherited diseases.

Also i really don't see a reason to extract the gene? What would you be doing with it? Trying to make whales grow smaller or bigger? It doesn't really make much sense and would require a huge effort for little means as far as i can see.

Also my biology may be out of touch but when i studied genetic engineering , it wasn't all that easy (specialy in anything with a slow life cycle) and was more about adding in a new gene like one for resistance than actualy altering an all ready working gene.

[R1pp3r]

The gene that makes the human talk? It's in the brain you fucktard.

I thought it was in the DNA. Oh well, then it's also in the brain I guess.

[RATTY...]

Maybe I mixed a little with biology in general, but you get my point.
The reason to make whales smaller is because its makes it easier to farm them , if it was possible to farm them.

[Ephemeral]

I don't believe lions are able to hunt gazelles outside of their territories, in fact, I don't think any predator is allowed to hunt outside its territory without getting into a fatal fight. So according to your theory, Japan should not be allowed to hunt outside of its territory unless New Zealand and Australia are allowed to shoot whoever gets into their water for food.

You are wrong, animals hunt outside their own territories all the time, they encroach on other’s territories and many times get away with it. Sometimes times they will spar, other times they will battle to death, other times they do whatever they have to ‘fit in’ and make it work. There are species of fish, for example many sub-species of clownfish, that literally switch their own sex to fit into an existing territory (changing from a male to a female). So you are absolutely wrong.

Wtf are you talking about ‘according to my theory’? Should I assume that is your attempt to deflect the fact that you are incorrect and have painted yourself into a corner? I have floated no new theories or even taken a stand on the entire subject, but rather simple asked for justification on the ones you have taken.

Sorry if I have given you solid examples of how you are wrong. I was hoping you might put aside the emotion of being proven your position was incorrect and have an open mind. If that is your perspective, then it is not my place to try to help you. If you want to keep simply sucking people into inane arguments, I can simply ignore your posts in the future.

[Ephemeral]

And to anyone who is arguing that humans have not changed other species.
WTF?

Humans have modified EVERY single species, through selective breeding and now DNA manipulation, it has ever cared about. You you people really think that every single plant and animal you eat has not been? OMG. You think that corn, for example, was just like it was 100, 250, 300 years ago? How about 1000 years ago? 10,000?

You people must be the product of an educational system that taught creationism exclusively or something. Let me break the news to you people and sweep you into the 21st century, humans have altered EVERY SINGLE animal and plant we have deem valuable to us.

And Ratty, why make a correct point and then ruin it by being ignorant? Nothing like showing your ass with a sweeping generalization that condemns 270 million people who happen to live in USA.

[Ephemeral]

I'm not like that. I don't even like cow beef, btw. Stop generalizing, that's anything but me. Just because I find the consumption of whale disgusting means that I look down on other cultures?
And Maj, I may be 1/4 Jap but I do find some of the things that are eaten kind of gross.

The point is that 'what you find gross' is a learned behavior, as is most sympathy for ‘cute’ creatures.

If a person is starving, they will eat whatever they have to stay alive. If the only water you have is what you can wring out of your sweaty socks, then that is what you will drink. Learned behavior goes out the window in that kind of situation.

[Kyace]

... other times they do whatever they have to ‘fit in’ and make it work. There are species of fish, for example many sub-species of clownfish, that literally switch their own sex to fit into an existing territory (changing from a male to a female). So you are absolutely wrong.

Sort of reminds me of the internet. :)

[BleakFuture]

Star Trek IV?

heheh that movie is just weird.

[DoTheFandango]

Uh oh, the fatty is showing how stupid he is once again.

1. What kind of animals have we altered the genes on?
Belgian blue, the fat cow that gets so fucking big that it almost isn't able to stand.
A featherless chicken, from quite a few years ago.
Taken embryos or something from animals and inserted it in another one, so it gives birth to a normal animal.

2. Plants
We've altered the genes and such in plants, so they can endure harsh climate, last longer, taste better, grow bigger. I'm sure you've seen the ugly gigant strawberries from USA? Yes, its gene manipulated you stupid fat american nerd.

About Belgian Blue, we've altered the genes to those animals, but i think there was something with them in the first place. (Those animals aren't forbidden in some countries for no reason).

The gene that makes the human talk? It's in the brain you fucktard. And we already know which hormone who makes the human grow, we get pills to grow/stop growing (only for people who seriously need it), so it won't be hard to take that knowledge over to animals.

Next time, get things right when you correct someone you ugly pathetic nerd looking for attention.
(I was about to post the ugly picture of your fatass, but I've done it countless of times, and your ugly face is obnoxious).

Gg once again fatty, making a fool out of yourself must be your favorite trick.

Belgian Blue and the many plants that you talk about are actually products of mutation that scientists have cultivated over the past years.

Maybe you should learn about what you are talking about.

[Mobey]

Free Willy!!11

Yeh dude, awesomeeeee!!!!!11

[Ashlee]

EDIT: edit

[DoTheFandango]

[Epinephrine]

I'm just going to comment that those of you that don't know anything about evolutionary theory, biology, molecular biology or genetics really should not be commenting on such things. For those of us that do have a good knowledge of how these things work, you just look like an idiot even if you do use such amazing debating abilites as to call your debate opponent a 'fatty'.

[T3l Ca7]

You are wrong

Way to start a discussion.

animals hunt outside their own territories all the time, they encroach on other’s territories and many times get away with it. Sometimes times they will spar, other times they will battle to death, other times they do whatever they have to ‘fit in’ and make it work. There are species of fish, for example many sub-species of clownfish, that literally switch their own sex to fit into an existing territory (changing from a male to a female).

Are you arguing for me or against me? Your first argument was that there is nothing in nature's law dictates who has the right to eat who. My counter argument was that if you were going to use laws of nature that let me remind you that in nature, entities had territories and they defended their territories feriously.
Maybe I should be more explicit: there are only so much so natrue resources on this earth. If you are consuming the share that does not belong to you then someone else would be worse off. That's why there are territories: to differ 'yours' from 'ours'.

Wtf are you talking about ‘according to my theory’? Should I assume that is your attempt to deflect the fact that you are incorrect and have painted yourself into a corner? I have floated no new theories or even taken a stand on the entire subject, but rather simple asked for justification on the ones you have taken.

It means I have too many ways to prove that you are wrong so I am using 'your theory' so you are more likely to accept your defeat.

Well, it was not your theory but that is not the point.

Sorry if I have given you solid examples of how you are wrong. I was hoping you might put aside the emotion of being proven your position was incorrect and have an open mind. If that is your perspective, then it is not my place to try to help you. If you want to keep simply sucking people into inane arguments, I can simply ignore your posts in the future.

Let me get this straight: most people play SS want to win, most people get into discussion to prove their points. I would not want to play someone who wouldn't want to win and it is a waste of time to discuss with someone who does not even believe their own points to start with.

I like people to state that I am right, but it is no big deal if I am proven wrong - at least I have learnt something. But stating "you are wrong" 4 times in a post does not prove I am more wrong than if you have said "you are wrong" 3 times.

[ZeUs!!]

MAKE IT STOP