Man one step closer to God?

[Summa]

Nice fake quotes. (lol)

props for the attempted save, but i got your ass and its still above in your other post.

[kthx]

Nice fake quotes. (lol)

[PH]

in before hilarity.

[Centurion]

Posting in future Epic Thread.

[Summa]

Umm.. Alexander the Great was the leader of the Roman empire, not the Greek empire guy.

quote of a lifetime LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!!!

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

are you serious?

[kthx]

Umm.. Alexander the Great was the leader of the Greek empire, not the Roman empire guy.

[Summa]

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.

The RNA world hypothesis proposes that a world filled with life based on ribonucleic acid (RNA) predated current life based on deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). RNA, which can both store information like DNA and act as an enzyme, may have supported cellular or pre-cellular life. Some hypotheses as to the origin of life present RNA-based catalysis and information storage as the first step in the evolution of cellular life.

The RNA world is proposed to have evolved into the DNA and protein world of today. DNA, through its greater chemical stability, took over the role of data storage while protein, which is more flexible in catalysis through the great variety of amino acids, became the specialized catalytic molecules. The RNA world hypothesis suggests that RNA in modern cells, in particular rRNA (RNA in the ribosome which catalyzes protein production), is the evolutionary remnant of the RNA world.

The RNA World hypothesis is supported by RNA's ability to store, transmit, and duplicate genetic information, as DNA does. RNA can also act as a ribozyme, a special type of enzyme. Because it can reproduce on its own, performing the tasks of both DNA and proteins (enzymes), RNA is believed to have once been capable of independent life. Further, while nucleotides were not found in Miller-Urey's origins of life experiments, they were found by others' simulations[citation needed]; the pyrimidine base known as adenine is merely a pentamer of hydrogen cyanide. Experiments with basic ribozymes, like the viral RNA Qβ, have shown that simple self-replicating RNA structures can withstand even strong selective pressures (e.g., opposite-chirality chain terminators).

Additionally, in the past a given RNA molecule might have survived longer than it can today. Ultraviolet light can cause RNA to polymerize while at the same time breaking down other types of organic molecules that could have the potential of catalyzing the break down of RNA (called ribonucleases), suggesting that RNA may have been a relatively common substance on early Earth. This aspect of the theory is still untested and is based on a constant concentration of sugar-phosphate molecules.

Thats the basics of the RNA world hypothesis/theory. Essentially it claims that RNA was center stage at the formation of life for various reasons and based on various supports. As for further proof about the RNA mutating into DNA, in the experiments mutations did occur when strands of RNA came into contact with eachother. If this theory is true, the creation of the indefinitely replicating RNA is an enormous step towards creating our own life. If it's a load of shit, this is still a very amazing step in a positive direction but it doesn't necessarily mean we are too close to creating life. Either way it is a big fucking deal.

As for kthx....alexander was greek not roman....i don't believe a society has ever destroyed itself from technological advancement, maybe they were destroyed from its implications or the enormous ego they gained from it, but never the technology itself. Although the grounds onto which some of modern science is treading is beginning to look a bit dubious for me.

Edit: I just snagged those explanations from wikipedia, I have read a couple of articles on RNA world theory...its interesting stuff if you have the time.

[gran guerrero]

I guess all that money spent on the military will be a waste then according to wark

[paradise!]

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.

governator strikes again.

[Kolar]

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.

Isn't that something any civilization should want for? Divisions of labor but also self-determination for their people. Even without the American military industrial complex, which has remained intact since World War 2, the US would be in the best position politically and geographically to prosper given its position on the North American continent. I'm not saying the United States or even Western civilization will last but I don't think our reliance on technology or progressive social liberties will be our down fall. The world economy if not mutually assured destruction (while not at the tipping point) keeps Russia and China in check, short of the former not producing enough for their people I don't think either Russia, China or even the US would risk another world war.

I don't know if anyone has read the book Calculating God but its author puts forward an idea that as civilizations progress technologically the closer a smaller part of it has the potential to destroy the greater whole. Alien civizilations have to hit the "sweet spot" long enough to force their population to "mind upload" their conciseness to a simulated reality to avoid a disaster.

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.

I think most physicists believe if time travel into the past were to occur then it would create another universe distinct from our own with its own history at the point of divergence (assuming the multiverse theories are correct).

[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.

[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

[Vykromond]

a distant roar heard from outer space

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

[PaulOakenfold]

fart

[kthx]

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