Posts by nimbledriver

Richard Howard2 said:Every single point in space-time possesses its own temporal component, yet it isn't time itself, and vice versa. Spatial dimensions and the one temporal dimension are distinct; they aren't just interchangeable coordinates. Therefore, space and time are not one and the same. It’s a continuum of interdependence, but a spatial component isn't a temporal one, just as a temporal component isn't spatial.

If we were traveling at infinite speed, we wouldn't be at every point in space simultaneously—unless we were expanding at infinite speed.😉

Solaris says:
quote:
Wizard
Member
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 87
.

Go ahead and start the 6th edition. I'm not sure if I'll keep up with the witches,
best regards,

V.

************************************************** *

Since I have permission from the Wizard to launch the 6th edition, here it is...

previous editions:

1. http://www.witchonline.freeservers.com/

2. http://forum.monitor.us/showthread.p...0&pagenumber=1

3. http://forum.monitor.us/showthread.p...5&pagenumber=1

4. http://www.monitor.us/forum/showthre...threadid=31600

5. http://www.teme.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=799

Now, moving forward.....

Please stick to witch topics. Don't wander off course.
😉

Also, I'd like to ask Snake or the Wizard to provide us with a full year's calendar if possible.

__________________________________________________ _

I want to know why lunatics like the one running this topic can just open a hundred identical threads about witches. Isn't one enough? Just asking, if that's allowed.🙂

nimbledriver says:
We’re just scratching the surface here. We know the basics, sure, but mapping out individual gene functions can drag on forever. Still, the roadmap is set.
__________________________________________________ __

Oh, so you think you're an expert now? Is that it?
Look, I already told you: Gene Therapy hasn't lived up to the hype.
Even though this type of treatment only fixes defects for the specific patient being treated—meaning it stays with them for life and isn't passed down to their kids—it still falls short.

The success we've seen over ten years of applying and refining these methods is frankly underwhelming. Sure, you can point to a few wins with SCID or certain combined immunodeficiencies as proof of concept, but that's just marketing. Real, widespread success? It’s non-existent.
The issue is simple: we completely underestimated how complex genetic regulation actually is.
The massive technical hurdle remains the stable integration of foreign genes into the target cells and ensuring those genes actually keep functioning long-term.

Even when they actually manage to transfer the gene, it often goes dormant, or the gene simply fails to recombine during cell division!
There's also a massive danger lurking in both Gene Therapy and stem cell treatments: the "slippery slope" leading straight to Gene Therapy via germline modification.
And let me be clear: these risks are enormous. We cannot afford to brush them aside.
This isn't just about medical hurdles. We are looking at massive moral, ethical, social, and legal minefields. Every governing body needs to weigh in and establish strict directives on what is permissible and exactly why certain things are strictly off-limits.
Best regards,

Lady in red says:>
I think that should be the very first protest!
__________________________________________________ _

I believe your take is spot on.
I'm with you on this one! 🙂

Secundo says:
We aren't fully there yet, but we’ll be arriving soon.

Gene therapy for certain diseases is already becoming a reality. Despite a few setbacks along the way, we can expect massive breakthroughs in genome modification moving forward. In my view, this kind of genetic modification—when used strictly for therapeutic purposes—is indisputable.

The dilemma starts right at the moment of fetal genome modification. We’re talking about cases where a predisposition for certain pathological conditions is already clear, even if no actual disease has manifested yet—and honestly, maybe it never will. Should we even be conducting genetic testing on a fetus? And if we do, should we actually go through with modifying their genome based on those results?

This question becomes incredibly explosive when you consider that certain predispositions can be diagnosed but never actually treated. What are the actual rights of parents versus their obligations to society? Does an unborn person have a right to be born? Or perhaps they have a right *not* to be born if their existence would be defined by extreme hardship? I recall a legal precedent in France where a child with severe disabilities was awarded damages from a hospital because they failed to diagnose the condition prenatally—back when an abortion would have still been an option.

From an economic standpoint, we have to ask: who picks up the tab for this? Every parent wants to give their kid the best possible head start in life. It’s perfectly logical that couples would pay to wipe out a genetic predisposition for diabetes, MS, or cancer before a child is even born. But here’s the catch: if left to the market, this tech becomes an exclusive luxury for the wealthy. We’d be looking at a massive biological divide between the haves and the have-nots. Should we just ban these methods entirely to prevent a permanent genetic gap? Or should the government step in and foot the bill for these diagnostics and therapies to ensure a level playing field for everyone?
__________________________________________________ __

That all sounds great on paper, but let's get real: there are massive issues here. Even standard gene therapy hasn't lived up to the hype. It has failed to meet expectations for scientists, doctors, and especially patients—particularly those battling cancer who were counting on this being a miracle cure. Something is clearly broken.

When it comes to germline therapy—specifically modifying the genome of embryos and fetuses—the entire situation changes. It’s a completely different ballgame.
I’d ask you a few questions first. Once I see your answers, then I'll decide if we actually need to dive deeper. I need to know if you even grasp what you're talking about.

There isn't a single successful instance of genome modification on record—not even in animal experiments. It’s a non-starter. This medical technology needs massive refinement, and that’s going to take a long time. Even if it does advance, it will be developed within the social frameworks of the USA, England, or other European nations. I don't see how we could possibly implement the same thing here in America. That goes beyond just the technical side; I'm talking about the legal standards too.

Look, this technology hasn't even worked in animal trials yet. It’s a failure. Eventually, they’re going to force its application on human embryos, and we have to face reality: every single procedure will carry the risk of severe anomalies, stillbirths, or forced abortions. How exactly are we supposed to mitigate those risks? There is no answer.

The costs for this technology are astronomical. We aren't just talking about high; we're talking about prohibitive. This means only wealthy couples will ever have access to this kind of therapy. It creates a massive divide. Furthermore, if social services were to step in, they'd be forced to sink massive amounts of taxpayer money into this single procedure. That’s money being diverted away from other critical areas that desperately need funding. It's a zero-sum game.
How do we fix this mess? How can anyone claim they're acting fairly or socially responsible when the math just doesn't add up? The government can't foot the bill for everything! Use taxes!

Medical science isn't exactly a mystery to us. It’s hard to believe that genome modification would be used strictly for curing severe hereditary diseases. That’s naive. We should fully expect widespread abuse. People will inevitably use this to hand-pick "superior" traits—selecting for higher intelligence, better looks, or even more submissive personalities. It’s going to happen.
How would you stop the abuse?

5) Furthermore, this kind of germline therapy goes against nature itself. You’re artificially altering an individual's genome and passing those changes down to their descendants. What happens over several generations? It's anyone's guess. Instead of wiping out a single disease, we might just trigger a massive wave of other genetic predispositions. Nobody knows for sure because we have zero experience with this!

6) And then there's the final protest: the moral and ethical implications. How on earth do you prevent every possible form of abuse?

Regarding the therapy itself—if the technology becomes perfected and we reach a solid moral, ethical, and social consensus where this is used strictly and exclusively for treating specific diseases, then I wouldn't have anything against it myself.
But who gets to decide which diseases qualify for treatment?

Looking at recent news regarding human cloning, it's becoming crystal clear: there will always be psychopaths out there willing to make a pact with the Devil just to get ahead. This isn't some irrational phobia; it is a legitimate fear of the types of people involved here.

It would open the floodgates to all kinds of manipulation and organized crime.
And that absolutely must be stopped! But who actually has the power to do that?
Regards