1. You call murder a natural balance?

2. Decaying of tissues is caused by the lack of blood/blood cells going through the system. They would be putting the blood back in.

How about telemeres?

*loads shotgun*

Vaccinations "upset the natural balance of life and death" FAR more than this will ever do. This is just another method of preventing death. You know, like the whole purpose of medicine.

Then I suppose you're not a fan of CPR or deflribulators either. All this procedure does is extend the time a person can be clinically dead and still have a chance to be revived. Doctors have been using the technique of keeping a body cool to increase the time the brain can go without oxygen for some time now. This is just another step forward in that same technique.

1.) Yes. Murder is death, and many can say this to darwinism theory as "Natural Selection". If we bring back presidents that were assassinated, or girlfriends or boyfriends that were murdered, then we defy the natural instinction of protection of others, such as your spouse and thus survival. My point? There are several possibilities. I will use one as an example, and it just keeps building and building like a chain reaction.

Example for murdering lovers - This could be a possible cause of lowering intamacy with your spose, and probally make devorice rates raise...it could cause suffering to many.

Example for murdering others - Can alter history forever. We make it what it is today. Perhaps maybe if JFK was revived, we wouldn't have had President Bush, thus not this war, thus no killing. Or perhaps the other route...it can make another future president bring WWIII or something much worse.

Dodge survival and dodge the mind. If it is a murder of someone important, then we cannot progress with natural course, such as some events will spark the future.

2.) I'm talking about ageing specifically. I do not know much about this, but you see elderly people wrinkled, usually having some physical problems such as seeing, and feeling things, or walking. Now amplify that with people wanted immortality.





Prevention of death is by all means a good thing in my opinion. But once you have been strucken as dead, then that's like..."a loss to your scoreboard" so to speak. What I mean is, that when this progress reaches popularity to the public, that people will be more relaxed about demolations and destruction...crime increase, people layed back about killing others, or making people suffer...because they can always be brought back to life.

Medicine can prevent death. Ressurection is the issue I'm concerned with.

I may have misinterpreted this.. but.. are you saying that if someone died that you loved, and they were brought back... you would have lost some sense of intimacy with them?...


and LOL i didn't say that last quote... but you quoted me as saying it :p

This is why you ALWAYS aim for the head when you kill zombies, YA CAN'T COME BACK WITHOUT A BRAIN

Don't worry about it. Just like every other scientific "discovery" posted in articles on the internet, it will never actually be used and no one will ever hear about it again. You know, that's *really* starting to piss me off.

haha sorry bout that, I think Mort-Hog said it. My bad.

I'm saying that if you go out and hold hands in public, someone pulls a gun on your girl, tells you to give him her purse...and you're like STFU n00b and start trying to attack him while she gets shot...and probally you too...when she comes back to life she could say, "Why didn't you let me live? Do you not love me?"

That's all. Possibilities...

...Huh?... How could she say that? You arent the one that lets her live or not... You tried to defend her..

I misunderstood this concept before, and I apologize. I am a fan of CPR and etc., but I thought that this would be a way to escape mortality. Not a way to prevent death.

Then again, this is all about point of view. This method could be used for both...saving someone's life that was not their time, or living forever without having to worry about who gets shot.

Keep in mind that this is point of view. You are correct in which she may thank you forever for getting her purse back, and continue on with both of your lives.

But maybe she wanted someone to coroperate so she wouldn't get shot. Someone that cared if she died.

It's just the same concept in KOTOR II. If you help a poor old begger and give him 5 credits so he can buy food for his family, he could become a target of an attack to steal his money. From other poor people. What you did is have good intentions, but helping could also lead to more harm and suffering.

It would still be possible to kill someone, you just have to kill them deader than you normally might.

Like beheading?

The irony is that in many Pegan religions, namely Druidism and the old Celtics...people believe that cutting off the head of a person is seperating their mind and their body, thus leaving the soul to never reincarnate again. It kinda simulates here that if you slice off someone's head, it's gonna take a lot of medical science and surgery to make that person come back to life.

Don't even try to apply 'survival of the fittest' to humans. Evolution works only on genetic factors. Nothing else. Even if I murdered all religious people, I wouldn't have made the population any fitter because 'religion' is (probably) not a genetic predisposition, it's a social construct. And don't even start with 'social Darwinism'. That is an arrogant 19th century concept for rich white men to justify their oppression of others.

The whole reason humans have survived is because we're not slaves to genetic factors, and as a result we don't 'evolve', we're not subject to natural selection.

Anything that occurs in humans is a social construct, a creation by human civilisation. There are no 'natural laws' governing it.





300 years ago, anyone that caught flu would have been dead. No way to cure it, they were as good as dead.
Anyone that fell into a coma, they were considered dead.
Anyone that suffered a heart attack, they would be dead.
Anyone with an infected wound, they would be dead.

Medicine has been constantly redefining 'death', constantly pushing back what we consider 'death' to be.

'Death' is not an absolute concept, that too is a construct which we can define. And which we are.

No, all that'd be needed would be a bazooka.

I ask that you do not bring arguements of Darwinism here. All it will do is get this whole thing off topic and cause a lot of people hate each other because they have different beliefs, such as you and me (I don't hate you though. Just using this example for the "different beliefs" part). So, I will not argue the first part based on this. But my post about it still stands.

The second part, however...all I have to say is that be reminded that there is a line between prevention of death, and revitalizing from death. For example, you wouldn't use a "coma attack" or a "black plague" pistol on someone so they will die. You would use knives, pistols, etc...intentional harm.

Diseases are natural, and so are medicines. Thus, natural balance.

Reviving someone after intentional murder just dosn't seem...normal? No matter how much I wish this were right.

But I'm an open minded guy...I guess this could be natural, as it is possible.

But then again doing this can change the world forever, and do a lot of things. Some of them good, some of them bad.

This, by no means, works for an extended period of time.

It is, as it is now, to preserve the body while other tissue repair can be done.





Anyhow.

I'll let them test it on me, if they write me a check in the neighborhood of 7 figures.

Whatever your feelings on the issue at hand, please do not "hooray" at the idea of people losing what faith they may have.

This seems a bit too much like playing God, and that ain't cool.

Whatever your feelings on the issue at hand, please do not "hooray" at the idea of people losing what faith they may have. [/B][/QUOTE]

The idea that people will actually start questioning the fairy tale beliefs they subscribe to, and start following rational, logical thought? I'd thoroughly hooray at that, and crack open some beers to celebrate.



At the risk of sounding like a 12 year old, you started it!

And anyway, let's "assume" that Evolution is fact for the purposes of this discussion.

"So, I will not argue the first part based on this. But my post about it still stands."

haha "I'm too frightened to argue against the thorough debunking of my post, so I'll ignore it and assume it to be true anyway!"



Getting shot in the chest isn't 'natural', and neither is surgically removing the bullet and stiching together what damage was done.

By your thinking, we should just let all gunshot victims die because that would be the 'natural way'.

Are you alright man? You seem like you're....well...mad about this. :\ Just relax. Don't take things and twist it for your own gratification, such as your misinterpitation of me trying to avoid arguments of Darwinism. I'm just simply trying to avoid more debates than this topic needs.

By my thinking healing people from wounds and diseases and other things is a priority. But by raising them back from that would be a contreversy. I'm not saying this is a bad thing. I'm saying it could be.

And as to your logic with Religion, I quote:

Let it go dude. I've been trying to seduce people into an evolution debate as well - didn't work. There just aren't enough fundamentalists around nowadays





Tragically, Einstein was not any more religious than I am (apart from the perception of beauty and wonder, which I share with him) - so don't go appealing to authority with that quote too much.

It seems to me like a valid medical procedure once it's perfected. Not even close to playing god. It sounds a lot like Cryogenics in a way.

I'm not a religious man either. But who are you to question another person's faith? He said the quote, and I have quoted him for saying it. That's all...

Nope. It's stuff you squirt in your nose when it gets dry.

It's pronounced "Fronk-un-steen"

Einstein was wrong about quantum physics, and he may certainly be wrong about that.

Just because Einstein said it, doesn't make it right by virtue of being said of by Einstein.

You misunderstand me again. I am not useing Einstein as an authority; I am merely useing his quote to express what I'm thinking.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

This is most interesting. It sounds as if they have some kinks to work out, but it would be amazing if it can be perfected it for use on humans.



Must you always try and put down those who are religious? It seems that you are actually physically incapable of holding you tongue when it comes to these matters. You don't need to go out of your way to patronize us.

Well... what happens when someone has been dead for 3 hours, they're brought back to life and tell the world that they experienced nothing?

Chaos?

I'm not usually part of that crowd, but this thing genuinely creeps me out.

Don't worry, the pope will think of something.

I might be in favour if we could resurrect the old pope.

Umm. The former pope probably decayed too much....

Zombie Pope?

Just remain quiet.