User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 23

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    29,487

    Default Weird science/mad science



    TRIGGER WARNING: Animal experimentation

    So, I suppose the central question from this video I'd like to ask if you agree with the narrator, if there were frankenstein mad science experiments going on do you think that we'd even ever come to know about it?

    I've seen some insane stories about the discovery of animals with human like features but then I'm not sure if its all internet bullshit (there is an awful lot of internet bullshit and that's for sure).

    Personally, I dont know, I do think that medical tech is repressed though, I also think that there are probably regenerative medicines, nano tech, all sorts of things which are in existence already but which the majority of the population will never ever know about, its the preserve of the very few, but I'm not decided if its a matter of obscene expense or true elitism/privilege.

    The stories that I've heard about rich guys going for regular infusions of blood from much younger people, stem cell technology, stuff like that is enough to convince me of the existence already of what I would call "medical privilege".

    If you have other videos or articles about mad science share them here.

  2. #2

    Default

    Well, I AM a mad scientist .

    Seriously. Some of the stuff I have done in lab... ha!
    It is our duty to create meaning.

    If only it were that simple.

  3. #3
    Straighten up, Fly right Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    26,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Survive & Stay Free View Post
    Personally, I dont know, I do think that medical tech is repressed though, I also think that there are probably regenerative medicines, nano tech, all sorts of things which are in existence already but which the majority of the population will never ever know about, its the preserve of the very few, but I'm not decided if its a matter of obscene expense or true elitism/privilege.

    The stories that I've heard about rich guys going for regular infusions of blood from much younger people, stem cell technology, stuff like that is enough to convince me of the existence already of what I would call "medical privilege".

    If you have other videos or articles about mad science share them here.
    Given how bent out of shape people get about simply using stem cells to treat diseases like Parkinson's, I'm not surprised research even further off the beaten track is not made public. That would spell instant death for it.
    Though the ground was burnt and everything turned into ashes, we will revive again. The sky is still blue, the crashing waves from long ago are unchanged. This is Earth, our planet. This dream is in the hearts of people; so long as they do not abandon it, it will not fade away. For the sake of tomorrow, keep a song in your heart. For the sake of our future, let us stop our crying and stand on our ground firmly. ~Maya
    Likes biohazard liked this post

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    29,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Given how bent out of shape people get about simply using stem cells to treat diseases like Parkinson's, I'm not surprised research even further off the beaten track is not made public. That would spell instant death for it.
    Yeah, I think that's right, I was thinking about that late last night/early this morning, after posting this, although do you not think that a lot of the sensation about that sort of mainstream research is stoked by suspicions the public have that there's always some sort of frankenstein just out of view?

  5. #5
    Straighten up, Fly right Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    26,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Survive & Stay Free View Post
    Yeah, I think that's right, I was thinking about that late last night/early this morning, after posting this, although do you not think that a lot of the sensation about that sort of mainstream research is stoked by suspicions the public have that there's always some sort of frankenstein just out of view?
    No. I think sensationalism about mainstream research is fueled by ignorance of what research involves, such that people think the mainstream research IS some sort of frankenstein affair. Having skewed values helps, too (prioritizing ideology over concrete results that can help lots of people.)
    Though the ground was burnt and everything turned into ashes, we will revive again. The sky is still blue, the crashing waves from long ago are unchanged. This is Earth, our planet. This dream is in the hearts of people; so long as they do not abandon it, it will not fade away. For the sake of tomorrow, keep a song in your heart. For the sake of our future, let us stop our crying and stand on our ground firmly. ~Maya
    Likes N/A, biohazard liked this post

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    29,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    No. I think sensationalism about mainstream research is fueled by ignorance of what research involves, such that people think the mainstream research IS some sort of frankenstein affair. Having skewed values helps, too (prioritizing ideology over concrete results that can help lots of people.)
    I appreciate the religious right in the US is such a thing that you need to keep referencing it and their role in these things, I'm thinking beyond that context though, I think its less likely that that sort of thinking is what's holding things up but marketisation and market values.

  7. #7
    Straighten up, Fly right Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    26,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Survive & Stay Free View Post
    I appreciate the religious right in the US is such a thing that you need to keep referencing it and their role in these things, I'm thinking beyond that context though, I think its less likely that that sort of thinking is what's holding things up but marketisation and market values.
    In the US, marketing plays to those values. In other parts of the world, it likely plays to whatever the prevailing popular values are there.
    Though the ground was burnt and everything turned into ashes, we will revive again. The sky is still blue, the crashing waves from long ago are unchanged. This is Earth, our planet. This dream is in the hearts of people; so long as they do not abandon it, it will not fade away. For the sake of tomorrow, keep a song in your heart. For the sake of our future, let us stop our crying and stand on our ground firmly. ~Maya

  8. #8
    Complex paradigm Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNTJ
    Enneagram
    513 so/sp
    Posts
    14,785

    Default

    Yes, medical privilage is surely already the case all across this world. That is totally obvious.


    Which is why I am skeptical about any social models which boost individuality over what I call "unhealthy line". Because both too much market and continuation of technologial development when combined will almost surely lead into creation of some kind of super class ... and that almost surely means a major mess at some point. Will the super class actually be made out of rich people or they will be overthrown by mad scientists is up for a debate. However the fact is that so far there was no mechanism that permanently managed to stop technological development and therefore privacy will have to be reduced in order to make sure that someone doesn't do secret dangerous experiments. However that is probably doomed initiative since not every country on this planet is democratic and that surely wouldn't change anytime soon.


    This is possibly the greatest challange of 21th century. How to protect the people from all the profund changes that technological potential brings. Digitalization, GMO food, internet addictions, medical manipulations, climate change ... etc. The current economic models are unlikely to survive all of this and they are unlikely to be the part of the solution either ... but what will be the replacement is still very unclear.
    Likes biohazard liked this post

  9. #9
    Complex paradigm Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNTJ
    Enneagram
    513 so/sp
    Posts
    14,785

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Virtual ghost View Post

    This is possibly the greatest challange of 21th century. How to protect the people from all the profund changes that technological potential brings. Digitalization, GMO food, internet addictions, medical manipulations, climate change ... etc. The current economic models are unlikely to survive all of this and they are unlikely to be the part of the solution either ... but what will be the replacement is still very unclear.

    And the worst part is that most of the people doesn't get the fact that we have profound problem with how everything works at the moment and that trends are on collision course that wouldn't be pretty after a certain point.
    Today people are dependant on technology for a living but the most of them know no more than the most basic stuff about it, what results with the outcome that peope profoundly don't understand their environment or the existing trends ... what inevitably leads into problems as well as conspiracy theories.
    Likes biohazard liked this post

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    29,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Virtual ghost View Post
    Yes, medical privilage is surely already the case all across this world. That is totally obvious.


    Which is why I am skeptical about any social models which boost individuality over what I call "unhealthy line". Because both too much market and continuation of technologial development when combined will almost surely lead into creation of some kind of super class ... and that almost surely means a major mess at some point. Will the super class actually be made out of rich people or they will be overthrown by mad scientists is up for a debate. However the fact is that so far there was no mechanism that permanently managed to stop technological development and therefore privacy will have to be reduced in order to make sure that someone doesn't do secret dangerous experiments. However that is probably doomed initiative since not every country on this planet is democratic and that surely wouldn't change anytime soon.


    This is possibly the greatest challange of 21th century. How to protect the people from all the profund changes that technological potential brings. Digitalization, GMO food, internet addictions, medical manipulations, climate change ... etc. The current economic models are unlikely to survive all of this and they are unlikely to be the part of the solution either ... but what will be the replacement is still very unclear.
    I read and reviewed a book for Amazon lately on this, the bioinformation side of it anyway, which had lots of things to say about the creation of a digital "commons" which may prevent, I would say only temporarily hinder to be honest, the possible monopolisation and repression of date collected on bioinformation, although even that does not necessarily prevent the products of that information, pharma, technologies, therapies, being monopolised but if the information, the starting point, is held in common theoretically there is a chance of competition between R&D firms or enterprise, even considering things like barriers to entry in the marketplace, economies of scale etc.

    The importance of stratification and status is never going away, I have gotten to the point were I think its something to be conscious of and attempt to manage within a permissible limit rather than believe its possible to outright abolish altogether.

    Rawls version of it, that the society is better that has inequality but the least well off it happier and more prosperous than the least well off in an egalitarian equivalent or alternative is a good one, though I do think in some ways it is a "cold war" ideology, when the USA had Russia around as a good example of an impoverished egalitarian society which had "equal shares of misery", sort of, I think there were always "developmental" issues with Russia, materially, culturally etc.

    The emergence of a sort of "uber mensch" is not going to be good for humanity, I think already the sorts of toxicity are clear, like the innovations in automation and robots is not leading to a chorus of "yay, we'll all be free to do stuff" but more of a "what are we going to do with all these people?", as though that's the sort of thinking anyone should engage in and it contains all sorts of blind spots, exceptionalism, othering etc. Like no one thinks of themselves as the "surplus" or "problem" when they think that way.

    However, if that's the average fool's response to technological displacement, what's the view of some sort of genetically advanced or engineered superman going to be?

    There was a plot line in the classic star trek about this, it was what introduced the character of Khan, which was later in the movie, I think there was a book too about the creation of "immortals" by uber rich special interests, it could have been Wes Craven was associated with it or meant to adapt it or something, once upon a time.

Similar Threads

  1. Weird Science
    By raz in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-27-2009, 10:46 PM
  2. Science
    By heart in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 10-08-2007, 07:25 PM
  3. Famous Lies In Science
    By Heero in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 10-08-2007, 06:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO