How to Build a Dinosaur

No, it's not quite Jurassic Park, but it's intriguing nonetheless..

In the following lecture, world renowned paleontologist, Jack Horner, explains how recent breakthroughs in reverse evolution will enable scientists to eventually genetically engineer a dinosaur (of sorts):

Why do visions of a man flicking a lighter in a dark powederstore come to mind?

AlbertCurtis wrote:Why do visions of a man flicking a lighter in a dark powederstore come to mind?

Hahah I understand your apprehension. However, the sort of dinosaur Dr. Horner claims scientists will be able to engineer seems to be quite small and relatively harmless.

Celtiberian wrote:Hahah I understand your apprehension. However, the sort of dinosaur Dr. Horner claims scientists will be able to engineer seems to be quite small and relatively harmless.

Its not size per se that is the main worry -- a virus is after all so small it can just barely be seen at all -- it is the effect of introducing a non natural life form into a living system, particularly the microbiological effects ie the potential for breeding new and better, viruses and bacterium. The potential for massive unintended consequences is vast.

Then too there is the fact that the resources used on this quest could and most likely should be used for more germain nuts and bolts types of pressing issues like over population, and soil deletion, as just two examples. These sorts of things at this time are like cleaning up the place before the Deluge; not real good use of time and resources if you follow.

AlbertCurtis wrote:Its not size per se that is the main worry -- a virus is after all so small it can just barely be seen at all -- it is the effect of introducing a non natural life form into a living system, particularly the microbiological effects ie the potential for breeding new and better, viruses and bacterium. The potential for massive unintended consequences is vast.

Potential for unintended consequences does indeed exist, though I think it's safe to assume that the individuals engaged in this sort of research appreciate those possibilities and will, therefore, most likely proceed with an adequate degree of caution.

Then too there is the fact that the resources used on this quest could and most likely should be used for more germain nuts and bolts types of pressing issues like over population, and soil deletion, as just two examples. These sorts of things at this time are like cleaning up the place before the Deluge; not real good use of time and resources if you follow.

I understand and basically agree with you. The resources used to facilitate this type of research may be considerable, though I'm fairly certain it doesn't take up an appreciable portion of the state's budget. The amount of money spent on military research and development, for example, far eclipses it. Likewise, the vast human resources devoted to creating harmful nonsense, such as 'derivatives' (and other financial instruments), is much more concerning than the relatively few people involved in dinosaur research. These are obviously systemic issues and, consequently, can only be addressed by fundamentally changing our mode of production.

Having said that, the reason I posted the lecture was simply because I've always been interested in paleontology, and because I think it's a fascinating example of the work currently being conducted in genetic engineering.

Celtiberian wrote:Potential for unintended consequences does indeed exist, though I think it's safe to assume that the individuals engaged in this sort of research appreciate those possibilities and will, therefore, most likely proceed with an adequate degree of caution.

I am also just as certain that NOBODY ever assumes they are not proceeding with an adequate degree of caution, ya know? Pandora surely thought she was as cautious as could be, no? Not many people are objective and even those are not as objective as they would like to think of themselves as being. This sort of tinkering around with such powerful forces is usually a prelude to worse things yet to come. Since if you can make a dinosaur or what ever form of exotic life what is to stop super soldiers or sex slaves or genetic slaves (think delta epsilon, Brave New World...)..... they are just products after all... better to keep the genie in the bottle.

AlbertCurtis wrote:I am also just as certain that NOBODY ever assumes they are not proceeding with an adequate degree of caution, ya know? Pandora surely thought she was as cautious as could be, no? Not many people are objective and even those are not as objective as they would like to think of themselves as being. This sort of tinkering around with such powerful forces is usually a prelude to worse things yet to come. Since if you can make a dinosaur or what ever form of exotic life what is to stop super soldiers or sex slaves or genetic slaves (think delta epsilon, Brave New World...)..... they are just products after all... better to keep the genie in the bottle.

Well now we're entering into a wider discussion of bioethics, which is probably worthy of a thread unto itself.

For now, I'll simply say this: I think it's clearly unethical to contemplate creating sentient beings specifically for warfare, sexual servitude, slave labor, and so forth. Genetically engineering a small dinosaur, however, is fairly benign, in my opinion. Moreover, the study of reverse evolution has the potential for providing very important insights into many facets of life.