Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Who's to say this isn't already happening?

How would the few who're in control of the markets benefit from the world knowing about our ability to make designed people as opposed to randomly born people?

The rich need to be smarter than the poor to stay that way, if my children are smarter than your children my children can provide for me a better retirement home than yours.

These people would be snobish and greedy, so as to not be concerned with the lower class.

But not too ambitious to the extent of megalomania, who'd take from their parents if it benefited them enough.

Originally posted by Oneness
Who's to say this isn't already happening?

Me. Where's your evidence?

Originally posted by Oneness
How would the few who're in control of the markets benefit from the world knowing about our ability to make designed people as opposed to randomly born people?

How would even 1% of the population hide this from everyone else?

Originally posted by Oneness
The rich need to be smarter than the poor to stay that way, if my children are smarter than your children my children can provide for me a better retirement home than yours.

Not smarter, just richer. Intelligence isn't a direct link to wealth. After a certain point there's actually an inverse relationship between the two. The #1 factor in predicting your wealth is your parent's wealth. You don't need to be smart (though it helps), you just have to have a good start.

...

This belongs in the conspiracy forum imo. Usually there's at least one shady link providing a back story. Until there's something more concrete, this is just paranoid speculation.

Impressive title at least.

Nature Vs. Nurture.

Your say there's a drop in productivity when needs are fulfilled. That is a perfectly reasonable and, for the most part, accurate summation. However, if you design certain traits, certain qualities - success builds confidence and when one is self-centered and driven only by obsession - there becomes an exponential need to accumulate more wealth in which the parents can feed on like nice fat ticks while the rest of the world literally has to empty their pockets to feed this fat tick.

Ok. Anyway:

Originally posted by Digi
Where's your evidence?

^In his head. There's also a bunch of other stuff in his head, most of which would be enough to qualify him for a lifetime in a psych ward.

Originally posted by Epicurus
^In his head. There's also a bunch of other stuff in his head, most of which would be enough to qualify him for a lifetime in a psych ward.

Sure. I'm not trying to engage him on every point, just drive home the central idea that opinions need evidential justification to be taken seriously.

test tube babies. seems real to me.

Originally posted by Epicurus
^In his head. There's also a bunch of other stuff in his head, most of which would be enough to qualify him for a lifetime in a psych ward.

Have you seen his profile? At any given point it looks like probable cause.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Have you seen his profile? At any given point it looks like probable cause.

Ha, wow. Never actually looked at it until you mentioned it.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Have you seen his profile? At any given point it looks like probable cause. So many pretty pictures.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
So many pretty pictures.

Several incarnations ago he had a bunch of shirtless selfies too. You missed out.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Several incarnations ago he had a bunch of shirtless selfies too. You missed out.

You DL'd them but won't share.

Hobos around here will buy them for a bottle of hooch and a handy. What are you willing to offer?

Originally posted by Oneness
Who's to say this isn't already happening?

How would the few who're in control of the markets benefit from the world knowing about our ability to make designed people as opposed to randomly born people?

The rich need to be smarter than the poor to stay that way, if my children are smarter than your children my children can provide for me a better retirement home than yours.

No. We are nowhere even close to being able to do this.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No. We are nowhere even close to being able to do this. That's what they WANT you to think.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
That's what they WANT you to think.

I'm pretty sure they don't want me to think.

I'm not paranoid, I've merely embraced the fact that money is the central driving force for a Dystopia; a gap and pleasure, wealth, and physical health between the rich and the poor that makes the social caste of Ancient Egypt seem euphoric.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No. We are nowhere even close to being able to do this.

8ZzN9Q_aQqc

Perhaps funding was cut off so an MK-ultra esque, privately funded group could research it with compensation liken to the collective wealth of the Rothchilds.

If you were being paid billions of dollars every 5 years among hundreds other eminent scientists to diligently sequence nucleotides, would you ask why?

And how long do you think it would take before they've found a combination that makes Einstein, Brad Pitt and Usain Bolt put together?

I couldn't say for sure - but given the resources, time-spent, and organization, that's something you only saw during the manufacturing of war-machines during WWII and the multi-staged nuclear stockpile created during the Cold War with Russia.

After 40 years you'd think these private researchers constantly being pulled in fresh out of their PhDs would be so far ahead of the scientific community at this point in time. 4 decades to be precise.

This is obsolete knowledge. Next it was radical stem-cell based DnA alteration to get a better result through genetic modification in life than a preconceived life predisposed to be superior but unaltered, at least in the nature aspect, throughout nurture/life. The advantage of genetic manipulation includes shape-shifting into the perfect form and preventing senescence, the magic of the stem-cells of children in the womb. When this happens one day, it will be covered up and the rest of the scientific community will not be founded to make the same discovery and share it publicly.

Now we'd be more into mind-uploading.

But the king of all human-enhancement is finding a way to make synthetic neurons fire off as slowly as real neurons to replace every nerve and neuron in the networks with the human brain and nervous system. Uploading a consciousness merely creates a new nigh-immortal life-form with the consciousness of the man it's based on. That man is still subject to death and disease, unlike if you replaced all of his cells with synthetic counterparts. The product of this will be far more capable than merely an uploaded mind, it would be physically superior as well as linked into the grid and all information and knowledge humanity holds.

Is that you?

In the flesh.

Originally posted by Oneness
...And how long do you think it would take before they've found a combination that makes Einstein, Brad Pitt and Usain Bolt put together? ...

Millions of years.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Millions of years. Nice guesstimate.

"These techniques are being perfected through experiments on plants and animals, and as scientists continue to uncover the secrets of the human genome, we are progressing towards this tempting, futuristic world. Engineered organisms, such as glow-in-the-dark cats, abnormally muscular cows, and insect-resistant corn, have already been successfully developed, and designer babies may be next (Simmons)." - See more at: http://pitjournal.unc.edu/article/prospect-designer-babies-it-inevitable#sthash.wF9trjYp.dpuf

You're just not flattering the notion of private research and Atlas Shrugged's method of taking geniuses fresh out of school and having them sequence.

Originally posted by Oneness
Nice guesstimate.

"These techniques are being perfected through experiments on plants and animals, and as scientists continue to uncover the secrets of the human genome, we are progressing towards this tempting, futuristic world. Engineered organisms, such as glow-in-the-dark cats, abnormally muscular cows, and insect-resistant corn, have already been successfully developed, and designer babies may be next (Simmons)." - See more at: http://pitjournal.unc.edu/article/prospect-designer-babies-it-inevitable#sthash.wF9trjYp.dpuf

You're just not flattering the notion of private research and Atlas Shrugged's method of taking geniuses fresh out of school and having them sequence.

Your conclusions are way, way premature.

Perhaps. Perhaps not.

I post ideas, not hypotheses.

This allows me to touch a greater range of subjects and actually I learn quite a bit more from my ideas which are deduced from the many, many other ideas and hypotheses out there and often when I come out here I get quite a bit of sources from other members that tell a similar tale.

This feedback gives me confidence in my ability to reason.

Originally posted by Oneness
Perhaps. Perhaps not.

I post ideas, not hypotheses.

This allows me to touch a greater range of subjects and actually I learn quite a bit more from my ideas which are deduced from the many, many other ideas and hypotheses out there and often when I come out here I get quite a bit of sources from other members that tell a similar tale.

This feedback gives me confidence in my ability to reason.

But you misrepresent the truth.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But you misrepresent the truth. I'm not representing or misrepresenting anything. lol

Originally posted by Oneness
I'm not representing or misrepresenting anything. lol Sure you are. The underling idea is that Nucleotide sequencing exists now and is being used by the rich for some purpose.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Sure you are. The underling idea is that Nucleotide sequencing exists now and is being used by the rich for some purpose. That isn't a representation of any truth.

It is a suggestion that it could be a possible truth.

If it were a hypothesis (hypothetical truth), then I would be suggesting that it is a possible truth, and then I'd have to find conclusive objective evidence that it was true in order for this hypothesis to be validated.

But I'd rather hypothesize on which stocks will prove most successful and beneficial for my investments.

I read and find the syntax on real hypotheses so I can piece together conclusions like this one. I'm interested in painting a scientifically literate picture of the world and expressing it through my ideas.

I'm more interested on why the idea in and of itself is unscientific than if I'm being unscientific. In other words, I don't want anyone arguing motives or if it can be kept secret. I want people arguing on the possibility of it being developed sooner through private research than by the scientific community given enough resources and effort.

The cause for my belief that it could be achieved more quickly through private funding is that the Rothchilds as a family will pay smart fresh young minds more than the government would for public research on designer babies, and provide for them better facilities and more time to get things right.

From my understanding the scientific community is already on the verge of making a breakthrough, as that article has us building cats that glow in the dark and making statements such as "near-future" for humans.

Originally posted by Oneness
That isn't a representation of any truth.

Finally the truth.

Okay, were you proving something to yourself?

Thanks for contributing nothing to my thread.

But this tread is pure BS anyways.

Originally posted by Oneness
Okay, were you proving something to yourself?

Thanks for contributing nothing to my thread.

Your welcome. I'm glad to be of service.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Your welcome. I'm glad to be of service. Not only did misinterpret my motives in creating this thread, but you ignored me when I tried to explain what my motives are in these kinds of threads.

Go live off in your own little world then, don't read or watch anything just because it isn't true.

I'm sure you watch movies, don't you? Don't do that, their depiction aren't entirely true.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
But this tread is pure BS anyways. If you could grasp the concepts, you wouldn't be saying that.

Most people just link articles, Digi and myself go deeper in discussions.

Shakyamunison just read Digi's response in which there's no way to know for sure without credible sources, said, "Yeah but you don't know if it's true." So I responded, "You're right, I don't." So then she said, "Ahah! So you **** you and your thread I win!!"

I know what she does, she reads the responses of individuals she deems smarter than herself and tries the synthesis their arguments into her own.

She does it on the lounge, she does it here. She tries to apply critical arguments, but I don't for argumentation, I care for discussion. Digi is trained to make argumentative cases, he's even admitted to earning a teaching degree on the college level.

I don't mind you attacking the plausibility of it, I mind you asking me to pull evidence of an event that I never claimed was true. Because what I'm looking for is an argument as to why it's not plausible or further evidence for plausibility that I was unaware of.

And most of the time Seatlh Moose aka Max Well, her boyfriend, just comes on to do what she does. Literally most of the time centered around winning arguments with me. There's no winning a discussion.

There isn't much of a discussion to be had. You've basically stated the premise of Gattaca and asked "What if it's real?" Throw in a large sprinkling of conspiracy and paranoia and you've got yourself a topic not capable of progressing far.

"It's not real, it hasn't happened yet" we reply.
"Friggin might have. And us Normies are f*cked if it has" you counter.


Now where?

Is there a reason why you think it's impractical?

You should address the issue of privately funded endeavors having far fewer limits than government funded. In fact, the only limitations of something funded by multiple families of billionaires is the limitations of modern technology. Private groups may well be far ahead scientifically in very, very specific areas such as this.

You think Shaky is a girl? Lmao.

would smash and not call the next day

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Have you seen his profile? At any given point it looks like probable cause.
Yes, I have. Weird shit.

Originally posted by Epicurus
Yes, I have. Weird shit. Thanks.

*profile commenting sequence engaged*

1. Enya:
2. Nature scenes:
3. Nature scenes with human stuff in it: