Sick 10:10 advert

Originally posted by Bicnarok
that you get a score 10 points out of 10 if you run about blowing people up who are polluting the earth, might as well wipe all humans out then🙂

This bloke deals with the problem very well imo🙂

YouTube video

He has some good points but I'm not sure if I entirely agree with some of those point. I'm sure even if human beings didn't exist species would still cease to exist but I woud think theres still alot of evidence that human actvity is wiping out species. Some of those species help regulate the ecosystem so we should defintely be worried. Anyway I think his point really was that people go overboard.

Provding we don't wipe ourselves out we may actually be here longer than the planet. If we start to have a greater understanding of time and space we could become gods. To an extent we really should take ourselves that serioulsy.

Originally posted by Deadline
He has some good points but I'm not sure if I entirely agree with some of those point. I'm sure even if human beings didn't exist species would still cease to exist but I woud think theres still alot of evidence that human actvity is wiping out species. Some of those species help regulate the ecosystem so we should defintely be worried. Anyway I think his point really was that people go overboard.

Provding we don't wipe ourselves out we may actually be here longer than the planet. If we start to have a greater understanding of time and space we could become gods. To an extent we really should take ourselves that serioulsy.

I doubt we'll outlive the planet, in fact, I think it's essentially impossible for us to reach the average lifespan of a mammal species our size, which is about 1 millions years. We're 100 thousand years old now and I'm skeptical we'll make through another thousand years.

Originally posted by 753
The problem is the extinction rate, which we accelrated far beyond what occurs naturally.

Yeah so I don't know what hes banging on about to an extent.

Originally posted by 753

I doubt we'll outlive the planet, in fact, I think it's essentially impossible for us to reach the average lifespan of a mammal species our size, which is about 1 millions years. We're 100 thousand years old now and I'm skeptical we'll make through another thousand years.

I do. Cyborgs actually exist now, crap ones but they do exist. Human beings could potentially evolve into cybernetic organisms. In that case human beings potentially could live 'forever'.

Originally posted by Deadline
Yeah so I don't know what hes banging on about to an extent.

I do. Cyborgs actually exist now, crap ones but they do exist. Human beings could potentially evolve into cybernetic organisms. In that case human beings potentially could live 'forever'.

Originally posted by 753
Well, I'm skeptical of the possibilty of this and wouldn't say they'd still be humans then, but even assuming it happens, machines lack the adaptative plasticity of living organisms and the capacity to generate new morpho-physiological varieties through reproduction, they wouldn't survive long in an ever changing environment.

You can be skeptical all you like its started happening already. You are also getting into a semantic debate about what a human is.

Originally posted by 753
but even assuming it happens, machines lack the adaptative plasticity of living organisms and the capacity to generate new morpho-physiological varieties through reproduction, they wouldn't survive long in an ever changing environment.

Absolutely if humans beings advance so far in technology that they can evolve into cyborgs they would'nt be able to adapt to an ever changing envinronment.

Originally posted by Deadline
You can be skeptical all you like its started happening already. You are also getting into a semantic debate about what a human is.

Absolutely if humans beings advance so far in technology that they can evolve into cyborgs they would'nt be able to adapt to an ever changing envinronment.

These cyborgs would lack all the characteristics of living cells, that allow them to adapt and perpetuate themselves. Populations of bacteria have far more chance of finding solutions to the problems of an ever changing environment than any supercomputer analyzing whatever inevitably limited data it is fed.

There is no reason to assume a race of cyborgs would be less vulnerable to extinction either, only some environmental factors would be different in assuring their destruction.

Originally posted by 753
No it hasn't, not in the way you're implying and the fact that some interactions between organic tissue and machines are possible now does not mean that humans will ever 'become cyborgs' or upload their minds into robots. It's not semantycs either, you're just reducing what humans are to memory and what we call personality.

Humans will never evolve into cyborgs, you don't seem to know what evolution actually is. Even if we create perfect facsimiles of our neurological networks or 'upload' the working patterns of our brains into machinery, this means nothing from an adaptative viewpoint.

These cyborgs would lack all the characteristics of living cells, that allow them to adapt and perpetuate themselves. Populations of bacteria have far more chance of finding solutions to the problems of an ever changing environment than any supercomputer analyzing whatever inevitably limited data it is fed.

There is no reason to assume a race of cyborgs would be less vulnerable to extinction either, only some environmental factors would be different in assuring their destruction.

facepalm

Originally posted by Deadline
facepalm

Originally posted by 753
Facepalm away as you clearly ahve no line of argumentation here and no real way of refuting my points.

I'll respond to that. I'm not responding to it because I can't refute your points, I'm not responding to it because you are clearly argumentative. Engaging in a discussion with you won't lead anywhere. I've also had a brief experience with you in the comic vs forum.

Originally posted by Deadline
I'll respond to that. I'm not responding to it because I can't refute your points, I'm not responding to it because you are clearly argumentative. Engaging in a discussion with you won't lead anywhere. I've also had a brief experience with you in the comic vs forum.

Originally posted by 753

Humans will never evolve into cyborgs, you don't seem to know what evolution actually is. Even if we create perfect facsimiles of our neurological networks or 'upload' the working patterns of our brains into machinery, this means nothing from an adaptative viewpoint.

What a daft comment, of course humans won´t evolve in the mutating genes sense.

Humans will probably use more versatile "parts" like light metal bones, eye´s which can see further, hearts that don´t konk out etc. As for using some sort of hard drive to store memories, why not it is plausable the problem is the "soul" (for want of a better phrase) and feelings which are probably to complicated to be stored, so the character of the person would remain.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
What a daft comment, of course humans won´t evolve in the mutating genes sense.

Humans will probably use more versatile "parts" like light metal bones, eye´s which can see further, hearts that don´t konk out etc. As for using some sort of hard drive to store memories, why not it is plausable the problem is the "soul" (for want of a better phrase) and feelings which are probably to complicated to be stored, so the character of the person would remain.

Yes and obvoulsy there are no advantage to being a cyborg.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
What a daft comment, of course humans won´t evolve in the mutating genes sense.

Humans will probably use more versatile "parts" like light metal bones, eye´s which can see further, hearts that don´t konk out etc. As for using some sort of hard drive to store memories, why not it is plausable the problem is the "soul" (for want of a better phrase) and feelings which are probably to complicated to be stored, so the character of the person would remain.

Because of the material impossibilties presented so far and the fact that even if you could store memories and make a copy of the brain activity patterns, unless the artifical network had equal complex plasticity it wouldn't be able to reproduce the way the human mind/brain changes over time from that point onwards.

Originally posted by Deadline
Yes and obvoulsy there are no advantage to being a cyborg.

Originally posted by 753
None whatsoever when compared to the plasticity of life.

Anyone else see how retarded this guy is? Oh and by the way one of my point wasn't just about cyborgs it was that if people were advanced enought to make cyborgs they would obvoulsy be advanced in other forms of science eg biology, nanotechnology etc.

Originally posted by 753
None whatsoever when compared to the plasticity of life.

Well I could do with a cyborg hip, and lower back parts to stop the pain I get EVERY DAY.😱

No benifits whatsoever? 😆

Your probably one of these people who dillusionaly thinks "God´s " creation is perfect, well wake up it isn´t.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Well I could do with a cyborg hip, and lower back parts to stop the pain I get EVERY DAY.😱 ...

Oh ya, I could use a new lower back for sure. 😎

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Well I could do with a cyborg hip, and lower back parts to stop the pain I get EVERY DAY.😱

No benifits whatsoever? 😆

Your probably one of these people who dillusionaly thinks "God´s " creation is perfect, well wake up it isn´t.

Originally posted by Deadline
Anyone else see how retarded this guy is?

Oh and by the way one of my point wasn't just about cyborgs it was that if people were advanced enought to make cyborgs they would obvoulsy be advanced in other forms of science eg biology, nanotechnology etc.

Now run along and complain that it's useless to keep debating the ones who don't agree with you like you always do here and in the vs forum.

Originally posted by 753
No they won't, if any transhumanist "improvement" will be applied at a population level, and it probably never will, it'll be genetic engeneering.

Because of the material impossibilties presented so far and the fact that even if you could store memories and make a copy of the brain activity patterns, unless the artifical network had equal complex plasticity it wouldn't be able to reproduce the way the human mind/brain changes over time from that point onwards.

Transhumanists would tend to point out that there is nothing privileged about biological systems. A cyborg or robot wouldn't have to be unable to adapt. Even without nano-tech they have the advantage of being able to swap out parts when the environment changes.