--- In [email protected], "hugheshugo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I find the confidence scientists have that we really are just DNA 
> expression and can perform experiments without damaging anything 
> quite comforting, to others it's sign we have no respect for the 
> sanctity of life. Different eyes see different things. A good 
> question for the religious would be; If people cannot actually prove 
> their POV should they be allowed to have a say in decisions that 
> affect the rest of us?
> 
> I think the church is more concerned with damaging any newly arrived 
> souls, if you believe in that I guess an animal-human hybrid would be 
> horrific to contemplate. I don't believe in souls as something 
> external but as our ongoing idea of who/what we are. But it gives me 
> the creeps when I think what would happen if they do a Dr Moreau let 
> them survive more than a few days and grow.

Good questions all, and I'll let others deal with
them. I'm going to a motocross race and hobnob with
bikers today, so I am clearly not worthy to ponder 
them.  :-)

What I will point out, for your possible entertainment,
is how science fiction has presaged your concerns 
above and some of the things you've been rapping so
well about the last few days, and how long ago. 

Jules Verne wrote "The Mysterious Island," which deals
with these concerns about genetic modification, in 1874.

You mentioned telescopes in one of your raps. Do you
know how the moons of Mars got their names? 

>From Gulliver's Travels by Jonathan Swift, first published 
in London in 1726:

"They spend the greatest part of their lives in observing 
the celestial bodies, which they do by the assistance of 
glasses far excelling ours in goodness. For although their 
largest telescopes do not exceed three feet, they magnify 
much more than those of an hundred yards with us, and at 
the same time show the stars with greater clearness. This 
advantage hath enabled them to extend their discoveries 
much further than our astronomers in Europe; for they have 
made a catalogue of ten thousand fixed stars, whereas the 
largest of ours do not contain above one third part of that 
number. They have likewise discovered two lesser stars, or 
satellites, which revolve about Mars, whereof the innermost 
is distant from the centre of the primary planet exactly 
three of the diameters, and the outermost five; the former 
revolves in the space of ten hours [modern estimate: 7 hr. 
39 min.], and the latter in twenty one and an half [modern 
estimate: 30 hr. 18 min.]; so that the squares of their 
periodical times are very near in the same proportion with 
the cubes of their distance from the centre of Mars, which 
evidently shows them to be governed by the same law of 
gravitation that influences the other heavenly bodies."

Swift named the moons Phobos and Deimos. When they 
were finally discovered by the American astronomer 
Asaph Hall in 1877, 151 years after Swift's descrip-
tion, he used Swift's names for them. Swift described
them 50 years before any telescope had been invented
powerful enough to see them. Go figure, eh?



Reply via email to