Supposedly they did this on Atlantis and possibly before this in Lemuria and Mu before when we likely still had space travel and genetic engineering before the fall of those technological civilizations. They likely fell because of an ice age or flooding. These eras were before 15,000 to 20,000 years ago. For example, the Ark of the Covenant is actually an electrical technology (read about it in Exodus in the Bible) that was and could be still a communication device that you could presently likely communicate with satellites or space ships. That Moses knew how to build such a technological device because he was the son of a KING (a Pharoah) who would be the people most likely to have access to ancient technology during those times. It runs off the magnetic fields of earth so no generator is needed. When Universities have built copies (miniatures of this device) power blackouts occurred that knocked out all power to up to 100 miles away and knocked down grids until these devices were destroyed.
The problem with this kind of technology is that it is not compatible with the types of electrical devices we now use. It is more similar to flying saucers that can travel both through time and through space. When Nicola Tesla invented free electricity and demonstrated it in Boulder, Colorado but was killed before he could give it to humanity by large Electrical Generating companies during the 1940s.
But, the electrical technology is more similar to what Tesla came up with that is used by an Ark of the Covenant than anything we use today. The other problem is that communication of all kinds, cell phone, radio telephone, radio and TV reception couldn't work the way they are presently designed along with this time of Arc of Covenant and Free electricity from the ground that Tesla invented. So, you would have to electrically redesign everything differently for free electricity and Arc of Convenants to be used for communication or as an electrical particle beam like it was used for during war in the Bible.
Also, the legends of Centaurs and Satyrs (Satyrs often being similar to depictions of the Devil today) were all genetically engineered creatures previous to 8000 to 15,000 years ago also. Also, men or women who could fly and had wings also could be genetically engineered as well.
All these things are completely possible with genetic engineering. However, just because you can do something, should you?
Most of us would think this would be a very unethical thing to do to any human embryo. However, there likely always will be people who do something like this who are sociopathic like the Robot Creator in "Ex Machina":
- Share this Rating. Title: Ex Machina (2015) 7.7 /10. Want to share IMDb's rating on your own site? Use...
The Chimera Quandary: Is It Ethical To Create Hybrid Embryos?
Audio will be available later today.
In this file photo, a professor holds a tray of stem cells
at the University of Connecticut. The NIH plans to lift a moratorium on
funding studies using human stem cells in animal embryos.
Spencer Platt/Getty Images
That's because last week, the National Institutes of Health proposed a new policy to allow funding for scientists who are creating chimeras — the non-mythological kind. In genetics, chimeras are organisms formed when human stem cells are combined with tissues of other animals, with the potential for creating human-animal hybrids.
Since September, the NIH has had a moratorium on funding these types of studies in order to consider the ethical implications of creating animals that could possibly have human organs. On the other hand, advocates say research could help scientists better understand human diseases and find new ways to treat illnesses.
To better understand all of the ethical issues at hand, All Things Considered host Ray Suarez spoke with Insoo Hyun, a professor of bioethics and philosophy at Case Western Reserve University.
Interview Highlights
On what the policy change at the NIH allowsThey are now allowing the transfer of human stem cells into nonhuman embryos, except for nonhuman primate embryos, up to the 14-day mark. And that type of research will be closely reviewed.
On reasons why ethicists are concerned about this type of research
One very large area of concern is animal welfare. We don't know exactly what effect, in terms of animal suffering, these experiments will result in. That's one.
There's also great concern about the level of human-animal mixing that might result in animals that are not 100-percent animal and not 100-percent human. We may be flirting with an area of human dignity that we just do not want to cross, even if the scientific value of the work may be quite high.
I am a general supporter of this kind of research under certain conditions. Which is, that it has to be scientifically meritorious and that there must be no other way to do the experiment but with this particular approach. So I really take it on a case-by-case basis — understanding that people are very concerned, and legitimately so.
On discoveries so far
One experiment that happened recently was when researchers put human glial cells, which are a type of human brain cell, into mice. They found that the mice were able to solve maze tests twice as fast as normal mice and had memory tests that were twice as fast.
So that's an area that in recent years has drawn some attention, and could be sort of a harbinger for the kinds of concerns people have as you go outside of rodent and go to more complex, more human-like animals.
On the idea of creating something that does not exist in nature
I think that is the root of many people's concerns. There's this idea of creating something completely new and, in some people's view, completely unpredictable. I will say though that this [is] research that has to be monitored very closely institutionally by oversight committees. They'll never allow a chimeric animal to roam the Earth and leave the laboratory.
But overall, I think the theme is the same. When you have a new ability technologically, it raises lots of new uncertainties of what to do with this ability.
On similarities between this and the abortion debate
It is part of the continuum of debates. I think we have a continuum of beliefs and principles and ideas of what it means to be a human — not everybody agrees. But this is definitely butting up against that continuum, because we are talking about embryo research and human cells.
On how review boards determine what crosses the line
Review boards do have a track record and a history of overseeing both 100 percent human embryo research and also animal research. So they'll have to find some chimeric approach, if you will, to this area. And so I think this is a work in progress.
No comments:
Post a Comment