The Dark Side of being a scientist

[ProjectParticipant 507]

Have you ever experimented? Did you feel the rush when it was done and the results showed? Do you feel the allure to test the limits of everything? Do you want to see what you can create? And where do you stop? Where is the line?

We have some scientists injecting human DNA into pigs so that they grow human organs that can later on be harvested. Some people thinks this is wrong, some say it intrudes into the domain of god. And other people think it’s a good idea if they can isolate the DNA so that they don’t create a hybrid. Of course this experiment is in it’s very early stages.

This is a big question everyone who loves to work with science have to question themselves down the line. What is the limit? What do I see as taboo? Is it an necessary evil? Is it something that you should not f~~~ around with?

For several people who I work with in science they create a psychological “mask”. For me it’s to see everything around me in the elements I know, how they are built up and functions.

When I have my “mask” on I do not see table salt anymore, but NaCl. When I experiment with a piece of meat from an animal as an example, I do not see meat anymore but how it’s built. Proteins, muscle tissues, the different enzymes. How it works and what it will need to function.

This is different for everybody. I know somebody who works with creating weapons. When he has on his “mask” he no longer sees people normally. His mind will always see the best tool to use to take somebody down.
For some scientists it’s more warped for other’s it’s pretty harmless.

So my simple question is:

How far are you willing to go?

[BlacqueJacqueShellacqueParticipant 6890]

Project wrote:

experiment is in it’s very early stages.

No it isn’t. This is what we are being allowed to see. Technology is much more advanced then any of we, the sheeple, will be allowed to know.

My people die for lack of knowledge.

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

Ask Dr. Frankenstein how that worked out for him—or Edward Teller; how’s that nuke bomb thing coming? Working out for ya?

I recommend the following movie: Frankenstein Unbound—yes a great Roger Corman classic!

[BlacqueJacqueShellacqueParticipant 6890]

PistolPete wrote:

Frankenstein Unbound—yes a great Roger Corman classic!

Downloading now.

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

Excellent flick! Raul Julia and William hurt at their TOP game! Plus it is one of the few “Frankenstein” flicks where the monster talks—a—lot. I particularly like:

“Did Victor make you”?
“No”
“Who made you?”
“I don’t know, God maybe”
“Who is God-maybe?”
“You’ll have to ask Victor that”
“I will”.

And the musical score and scenery is excellent—-Bridget Fonda was really hot!

[hmskl’dParticipant 6406]

The importance of blue skying .. thinking outside the box

.. because the scientific method requires a hypothesis, followed by the testing of the formulated hypothesis resulting the eventual formation of a conclusion .. I’ve always felt that this method limits the scientist.

I suppose in the world of ‘do no harm’ as in drug research this is essential .. but in other areas such as the future of male female relationships, how do we even know what to hypothesize? This is a real confining limitation if we follow the scientific method.

Early scientists could have hypothesized all day long that the world is flat .. just as we hypothesize that we are alone in this universe. the numbers tend to lean otherwise.
Before Marconi, scientists might have hypothesized an entire career on how to string wires across the globe to send code. They were missing wireless entirely.
Leonardo could have studied the wings of birds for lifetime trying to mimic the flapping and muscles needed for flight never realizing that the wings should be stationary.

As guys gtow, if we limit our hypothesis to the known world of relationships we might find ourselves butting our heads against the immovable obstacles that female tendencies and behavior put in our path.

It’s therefore essential to think outside the box and not even try to hypothesize within the safe zone of what we currently think of as typical dating or the norm wrt interpersonal communication between the sexes. We must accept the fact that in the near term .. just a matter of years, technology will avail us with possibilities that can’t even be imagined .. sitting in a cubicle and trying to predict the future is basically, naught.

Bots, holograms .. and dare I say .. direct mind stimulation via high tech-relationships might just become the norm as men free themselves from the bondage of women as we know them today.

Thus, the old dusty scientific method with all of it’s confinements, limits and requirements for the clearly stated hypothesis prior to experimentation .. might be completley out of date for the arduous task ahead. Instead, forging ahead with the best technology at each moment in time in a carefully defined direction and observing, a scientific life without any prior hypothetical limits .. essentially ‘blue-skying’ followed by periodic in depth discussion .. two steps forward, pause and evaluate, and then moving on again.

[Author]

Posts