Subject:
|
Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 30 Oct 2001 21:29:51 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
890 times
|
| |
![Post a public reply to this message](/news/icon-reply.gif) | |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Low writes:
> I think the ethicists are way behind the eight
> ball on this.
> My tips, and you heard it here first:
> 2002: designer human v1.0
> tested for genetic abnormalities, gender in vitro
> 2003: first cloned human being born
> 2004: designer humanoid v1.0
> nonhuman DNA incorporated in a viable human embryo
> 2005: first fatherless girl born
> 2006: genetic therapy in post-natal humans begins
> 2007: designer human v2.0
> selected for intelligence, attractiveness etc
> 2009: designer human v2.5
> this tiime selection for traits actually works
> 2012: designer human v3.0
> gene therapy in utero, both on clones and naturals where necessary
> in vitro selected naturals comprise 10% of births
> 2013: designer humanoid v2.0
> first humanoids born with a partially non-human phenotype (super strength)
> 2015: designer human v4.0
> complete control over recombination: any combination of parents possible
> 2020: artificial womb
> first motherless children born
> 2025: post-natal genetic manipulation for non-therapeutic purposes
God, how I hope you're right! But I'm less optimistic than you.
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply: ![](/news/x.gif) | | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
| (...) I don't really think it's cause for "optimism" -- in my book the longer it takes before genetic manipulation of humans is commonplace the better! But a lot of these processes are technologically feasible today, which is why I put such a short (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
![](/news/x.gif) | | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
| (...) I understood Larry's point differently, in that optimistically we might never go extinct (technology propelling us beyond the earth, the solar system, the galaxy, the universe...), but in terms of biological evolution we're more or less at a (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
133 Messages in This Thread: (Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|