KimbleKency1683 said:

I don't see how it would be advantageous for humans and i'ts just weird and gross.

I'd say the church has accomplish exactly what they set out to do - build upon people's natural fear and mistrust of change and new technology and project the air of "immorality" on new science.

There is no animale/human hybrid - that is a propoganda of the church to raise fear and disgust. Before drawing conclusions based on lies, exaggerations, and fallacies provided by any religion one should actually check into the facts before accepting them at face value.

The article said:

experiments currently planned call for implanting an adult human cell into an animal egg, from w[b]...

read more»

KimbleKency1683 said:

I don't see how it would be advantageous for humans and i'ts just weird and gross.

I'd say the church has accomplish exactly what they set out to do - build upon people's natural fear and mistrust of change and new technology and project the air of "immorality" on new science.

There is no animale/human hybrid - that is a propoganda of the church to raise fear and disgust. Before drawing conclusions based on lies, exaggerations, and fallacies provided by any religion one should actually check into the facts before accepting them at face value.

The article said:

experiments currently planned call for implanting an adult human cell into an animal egg, from which all the animal DNA is removed. The resulting embryo contains only human genes

Such "cybrids" are "devoid of an animal genetic identity"

"The aim of our experiments is to discover ways to make stem cells [to treat] human diseases," Armstrong says, "not to give birth to some abnormal chimera. Even if this were possible it has no scientific or moral justification and is in any case strictly prohibited by the legislation."

(emphasis mine)

I'd like to end this with some witty bit of wisdom, but frankly I'm constantly shocked that people don't automatically put any claim, accusation, or "discovery" made by religion into the "probably full of bs pile" until further researching it.

Excuse me for not reading the entire article

I will not. You chose to respond to this clip and based your response on an ignorant position. Had you taken the time to read the article you would have saved yourself a little embarrassment and you wouldn't have taken a part of spreading a general ignorance in science that plagues this world.

There is no excuse to comment on a subject when the points you make to support your position are nullified in the article that you were too lazy to read. That you defend yourself by insinuating its too much to ask that you familiarize yourself with what you are denigrating boggles the mind.

But there was no need to be facetious[/quote...

read more»

Excuse me for not reading the entire article

I will not. You chose to respond to this clip and based your response on an ignorant position. Had you taken the time to read the article you would have saved yourself a little embarrassment and you wouldn't have taken a part of spreading a general ignorance in science that plagues this world.

There is no excuse to comment on a subject when the points you make to support your position are nullified in the article that you were too lazy to read. That you defend yourself by insinuating its too much to ask that you familiarize yourself with what you are denigrating boggles the mind.

But there was no need to be facetious

I'm not sure of your contextual usage of "facetious" here. Some people mistake this word to mean "false" but that just doesn't make sense in this situation. The definition describes it as "not meant to be taken seriously", "amusing", or "lacking serious intent". I'm not sure how that applies to what I said.

Unless you meant it in the context of my making fun of you, which is not the case. In fact, I thought I was quite polite and proper to someone who was obviously making statements of incredible ignorance when they could have easily read the article and saved themselves the embarrassment.

I understand that you're trying to make a point, but there is no need to be so rude about it. No I did not read the entire article, I only read the clip of it and I'm not going to feel embarrassed or humiliated because I didn't. Maybe its people like you that plagues the world. I don't see how trying to put yourself out there as more intelligent or better than some one leads to any progress in trying to educate people about scientific advances. I'm sure everyone on CM does not read every single in entirety before they comment on it.

"I like clipmarks because it brings a very large variety of interesting topics up which I can browse through. If the clip interests me then I can read the sour...

I understand that you're trying to make a point, but there is no need to be so rude about it. No I did not read the entire article, I only read the clip of it and I'm not going to feel embarrassed or humiliated because I didn't. Maybe its people like you that plagues the world. I don't see how trying to put yourself out there as more intelligent or better than some one leads to any progress in trying to educate people about scientific advances. I'm sure everyone on CM does not read every single in entirety before they comment on it.

"I like clipmarks because it brings a very large variety of interesting topics up which I can browse through. If the clip interests me then I can read the source for more info." ____ Oortcloud

This was an instance where I browsed the article. I did apologize for not reading the entire piece, but I won't be criticized by some pompous asshole.

No I did not read the entire article, I only read the clip of it and I'm not going to feel embarrassed or humiliated because I didn't.

Then maybe you should. But rather than show a little humiliation or rather than apologize for wasting everyone's time because you were too lazy and arrogant to bother understanding what you were talking about, you choose to vomit out your ignorance as if it was actually meaningful.

Jeez, what is it about you people not just admitting when you are wrong? When you talk out your ass and you get called on it then yes, it stings. But don't blame me for pointing out your stupidity (both in not knowing what you are talking about and not taking the ti...

No I did not read the entire article, I only read the clip of it and I'm not going to feel embarrassed or humiliated because I didn't.

Then maybe you should. But rather than show a little humiliation or rather than apologize for wasting everyone's time because you were too lazy and arrogant to bother understanding what you were talking about, you choose to vomit out your ignorance as if it was actually meaningful.

Jeez, what is it about you people not just admitting when you are wrong? When you talk out your ass and you get called on it then yes, it stings. But don't blame me for pointing out your stupidity (both in not knowing what you are talking about and not taking the time to read the article before posting) and calling me a pompous asshole when YOU are the one trying to say you are too good to educate yourself before posting.

KimbleKency1683 trying to be clever with Oort's profile said:

"If the clip interests me then I can read the source for more info" ____ Oortcloud

Exactly! If I find it interesting I read up on it, otherwise I pass it by. I certainly don't go wading into it speaking like my opinion means something and then getting all bitchy when someone points out that everything I said is wrong as addressed in the article in the first place!

Reread my initial comment and show me how I was criticizing you any more than to show that the article answered all your "weird and gross" fears. You are the one who chose to stick your ass out further. Read the article, educate yourself, understand where you were wrong, and get over it. Certainly don't try to defend your actions because you don't like someone pointing out how pompous you are to not accept being wrong.

Oortcloud said:

I, for one, can fully admit when I am wrong as I have already done

This had nothing to do with admitting being wrong (although in looking back I still fail to see where you did that). This is about speaking to something that you didn't even bother to investigate and then acting like I was the one out of line for pointing it out. I mean really, you condemned the entire idea of cybrids based on your lack of understanding which would have been assuaged by simply reading the article.

I find it offensive that so many people speak to things that they know little about but have made a decision on, especially when the information is so easily obtainable. You quoted my profi...

Oortcloud said:

I, for one, can fully admit when I am wrong as I have already done

This had nothing to do with admitting being wrong (although in looking back I still fail to see where you did that). This is about speaking to something that you didn't even bother to investigate and then acting like I was the one out of line for pointing it out. I mean really, you condemned the entire idea of cybrids based on your lack of understanding which would have been assuaged by simply reading the article.

I find it offensive that so many people speak to things that they know little about but have made a decision on, especially when the information is so easily obtainable. You quoted my profile, but you must have missed this part :

I think people delude themselves quite a bit - buy into hysteria and live in fear

You did exactly that right here, and quite frankly I'm tired of seeing people going uncontested for it.