IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Attitudes to life extension via genetic engineering

Denis Loubet dloubet at origin.ea.com
Sat Feb 18 23:36:51 EST 1995


In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.950217225426.4163A-100000 at corona> Patrick O'Neil <patrick at corona> writes:

>On 17 Feb 1995, Rick Abrams wrote:

>> >> 
>> >> Drexler's ideas suggest a future of boundless wealth, opportunity and
>> >> adventure, not for a few billion, but for trillions. Drexler's science
>> >
>> >I know of his fantasies....
>> 
>> Translation: 'I don't want what he wants.'  

>OK, yes that is it, but...I'll wager my left testicle that the VAST 
>majority of people would most definitely NOT want to live with TRILLIONS 
>of other people.  People actually DO like their parks and wilderness 
>areas.  They actually DO like wildlife and open land.  They actually 
>DON'T want to pave the entire surface of the planet and kill off all 
>non-humans.  

>> 
>> What kind of technical people are US universities turning out today
>> anyway?
>>  

>They type who care about more than their own individual lives.  The type 
>who wants comforts gained from technology yet not at the cost of the 
>environment and other species.  The type that would rather have 
>relationships and interactions with living, breathing creatures rather than 
>machines and computers...leaving them for what they are:  tools.

Wait a minute. If you're talking Drexler's Nanotechnology, then there's no 
reason, other than man's stupidity, that we can't have BOTH our trillions, AND 
a clean natural environment.

With Nanotech, we can suddenly create vast arcologies both above and below 
the earth's surface if we want. We can live in habitats above and below the 
ocean waves, opening the other 75% of the earth's surface. If everyone can 
have a personal vehicle that can reach orbit or beyond, then the solar system 
is open as well, and truly significant numbers of people can leave the planet. 
All these new places to live can exist in perfect harmony with nature. 
Nanotech can bring the science of recycling to near perfection. No waste. We 
can produce foodstuffs at point-of-consumption if we want. Proflagate use of 
land for farming would no longer be neccessary, and could be returned to its 
natural state. You could have all the wilderness you want.

The only reason that all this might not come to pass is human stupidity.

-Denis-





More information about the Ageing mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net