Man one step closer to God?

[Summa]

Randomly sifting through news and news magazines while bored at work, I stumbled across this

http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/comment/reply/18191

Below is the official statement to Science Express the magazine, a further statement will be released later.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1167856

Creating our own indefinately self-replicating RNA is a huge step, which begs the question: Are we knockin on the door of creating life? discuss

[Nycle]

No idea what the underlying science is about, but I wouldn't be shocked or surprised to see a Dodo walking around in my lifetime.

[Edit] On a sidenote, does anyone ever think about the possible dangers of scientific advancement? Every time we see a major breakthrough it seems inevitable that it will eventually be adapted and used for death and destruction (willing or unwillingly). The European charter of fundamental rights even contains an explicit ban on the cloning of human beings; is this precaution warranted in light of advancements like these?

[kthx]

Tower of Babylon, once we rebuild civilization high enough, it will all crumble back down to the ground once again. Even if you don't believe in god that is pretty much the way history has gone. There has always been civilizations throughout history that were centuries ahead of the rest scientifically and culturally, and not one has ever been able to reach the pinnacle of what it was capable of. The human race was just never meant to obtain such heights.

[Nycle]

Tower of Babylon, once we rebuild civilization high enough, it will all crumble back down to the ground once again. Even if you don't believe in god that is pretty much the way history has gone. There has always been civilizations throughout history that were centuries ahead of the rest scientifically and culturally, and not one has ever been able to reach the pinnacle of what it was capable of. The human race was just never meant to obtain such heights.

I disagree, no major civilization has ever fallen because of their scientific advancements... yet. Can you name one? On the contrary, social ecological evolutionary theory states that more advanced civilizations are more likely to "survive" because of their ability to dominate, assimilate or even exterminate other ones.

[kthx]

Umm I am pretty sure that Athens fell because Sparta was jealous of how well they were doing scientifically and culturally.

I would like to say that the reason the Mongols were so avid when it came to destroying Rome was for the same reason, but I know they just wanted to control the land more than anything else, on top of that capturing Rome put them down in history was one of the most dominant short lived empires in history.

I am just saying how have scientifically advanced cultures really done well in history, look at the Incas, the Egyptians, the Athenians, China (although we could basically say they are still fairly powerful these days). All of these advanced cultures have been destroyed.

---

Lets take Greece for instance, Alexander took over a large portion of the map and was a genius as far as warfare, and how to handle the aftermath of it, he left his own troops stationed in towns he took over from the empire so that his troops could find wives and have families with the townspeople and they would eventually because Greek citizens without having to quell any Rebellions. But in the end even though he was years ahead of anyone else in terms of how he handled war, and handled the capturing of enemy territory he still ended up falling. It didn't really help him that much in the end.

[Nycle]

Well if you put it that way I can see where you're coming from... but I think we're talking at cross purposes. What I meant to say is that no civilization has ever destroyed itself purely because they advanced to the point where they couldn't control or regulate their own scientific achievements sufficiently. The examples you put forward were put down by an external force rather than science. And Rome collapsed because it was so massive that it became overstretched and therefore uncontrollable. Added to that, none of those civilizations even come close to the rate and level of innovation we're experiencing today.

[kthx]

I see what you are saying, but what about countries like Germany who obviously made decisions on who they were able to defeat in battle based on the technology they had created. the Vbombs, the Uboats, the Panzer tanks, the new fighting techniques (blitzkrieg etc). I personally feel that with all of the advanced technology Germany had at the time that it bolstered up their ego a bit when it came to deciding who they could beat. I know Germany didn't purposefully try to draw America into the war, but surely they knew that there was a possibility of the Zimmerman Note being intercepted and knew the risks. They obviously thought they could handle it.

Now as far other ways that scientifically advanced cultures have destroyed themselves is by becoming too secure in their technology over more real world things. Athens became a theological state more than a state of war, and because of this they had children growing up wanting to be poets, senators, artists, sculptors and engineers over growing up wanting to be soldiers and blacksmiths. I would argue that liberalism is doing the same thing in America as we speak, we are all so foolish that we think countries like China and Russia will never attack us, so we go on our way wanting to be rock stars, and sports stars, we want to be politicians, but we have a lack of people who are actually willing to fight even today in America. So based on that I would conclude that not even America will last forever, because eventually we will be attacked by a Spartan culture who has constantly been preparing and readying for war, while our attention is divided to other occupations and paths in life.

--

Yeah and I know that isn't exactly what you meant either, and you are right no country has destroyed itself using the technology that it invented for itself, but it has been a factor in the destruction of several civilizations.

[Squeezer]

It occured to me a few years back that humanity will go extinct before we can invent time travel, because otherwise someone would have come back and warned us about the fact that we would go extinct. Since no one except Ahnold has travelled back in time, it's safe to assume that it will never happen.

That thought made me sad.

[Nycle]

Anyways, I thought I'd share an interesting Wikipedia article I read some time ago that's related to this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

^ I haven't decided for myself yet whether I'm convinced that this point will come or not.

And no, I don't think I'm paranoid. Just feeling interested :fear:

[Nycle]

Anyways, I thought I'd share an interesting Wikipedia article I read some time ago that's related to this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

^ I haven't decided for myself yet whether I'm convinced that this point will come or not.

And no, I don't think I'm paranoid. Just feeling interested :fear:

I'd like to add that the more and further we speculate into the future the more absurd it gets. So you can all consider this shameless philosophical self-indulgence.

Ugh double post, sorry.

[kthx]

I could see it happening, I have always said that "The Time Machine" is a pretty accurate depiction of the future of humanity.

[PaulOakenfold]

fart

[Vykromond]

a distant roar heard from outer space

--the vague, faraway din of nonsensical speculation about the future

[Liquid Blue]

It occured to me a few years back that humanity will go extinct before we can invent time travel, because otherwise someone would have come back and warned us about the fact that we would go extinct. Since no one except Ahnold has travelled back in time, it's safe to assume that it will never happen.

That thought made me sad.

what makes you think that someone would try to warn the human race if they could go back in time

i wouldn't

[HateTheFake]

Well if you put it that way I can see where you're coming from... but I think we're talking at cross purposes. What I meant to say is that no civilization has ever destroyed itself purely because they advanced to the point where they couldn't control or regulate their own scientific achievements sufficiently. The examples you put forward were put down by an external force rather than science. And Rome collapsed because it was so massive that it became overstretched and therefore uncontrollable. Added to that, none of those civilizations even come close to the rate and level of innovation we're experiencing today.

idk sometimes technology comes hand in hand with sin. Even from a biblical stand point.