Yeah but this is a bit drastic.

__________________

Think you missed my point, i totally agree with the dogs being for benefit, and know they derive from a single species. BUT, through selective breeding these breeds have health issues and problems that are near non existant with natural form of the species.
.
The issues wouldnt be, if it wasnt for such breeding regimes, im not disputing the rights and wrongs, rahter the whens and whos.
genetics is a complex thing, and only through proper thought and deliberation can hybridising./morphign/selective breeding be beneficial and 'fair', but with dogs, even the dogs specifically designed as working dogs, for benefit of man have been done with much less regard for the dogs, but all focus on the purpose. This is obvious as we both kno, the hereditory, breed specific issues that are prevelant.

In the case of the enigma leos, people have created an unstable animal, that for the moment, most of the young seem to die pretty horribly. humans fault nothing else.. thats immoral.

Can think of a couple offhand
Bulldog
staffies,
GSD,
bedlington terrier
red setter
dalmations
the list goes on and on
im sure each of those has many other ailments associated.

__________________

Yup.

All true.

Just saying that in the grander scheme of things, a few glowings bugs or fish, esp if it does not harm their quality of life, is nothing to worry about, when compared to the TRUE cruelties of man over animal, for example, dog fights and bull fights.

If there is angst, it must deserve being pointed there...?

theres too many things for people to worry about everything in this world.

I think its quite different though.
We dont actually truely know the effects of the mutation and probably never will. we asume things are fine but the past has taught us we are nearly always wrong.
Look at tholidomide (sp), look at pretty much everything
doctors do. they try you on something to see if it works, if it doesnt they simple try something else, not truely knowing the implications... not knowing the true affects of the prescribed drugs.. i feel much safer, and confident wiht natural substances such as cannbinoids, than prescriptions, i do use them but only as a neccessity. Often in my experience, the list of possible side effects, and long term health issues with prescribed drugs is longer than your arm, consisting of some heavy things.. i just feel on the whole of things, the concepts good, but human inexp and ignorence is the reason for such things, though i totally understand why

I agree on the whole, dogfighting is undeniably worse, but equally, genetic manipulation opens a whole new world of possiblities. with IMO, far worse implications. If done properly there is not much worry..but nothing is ever done properly..accidents happen, lazyness is human nature. good ideas, are turned to evil plans..such as the nasty Anthrax strain (i think it was anthrax desiggned for good) Same as hybridising, good in theory, but never going to be carried out properly on the whole..always people ask can i breed my G rosea with my B smith? idiots that need to ask such things are generally the bad side of things, its these people who dont have purpose and doing it just because.
Im not having a go bud, jsut a nice debate on opinions.

__________________

Absolutely....

Science is neither good nor bad.

It is just a thing.

It is how it is applied that counts.

Yes, there have been errors in science, and I am sure there will be errors again. But that in itself is not a reason to fear the science, or not engage in that science. After all, it could be argued that nature itself makes mistakes, and that things go wrong 'naturally', with living creatures etc, therefore, we should all stop having babies, due to an example of a baby that was born with a defect.

I think that holywood has a lot to answer for, in demonising science.

Always science is made out to be an evil thing, and scientists made out like they have some insane plot to take over the world.

The reality is quite different.

The reality is that the scientists are the one's with the smarts, but it is the politicians who are in 'control of the world'. Only, unlike in the films, the baddy doesn't lose in the end, on the contrary, he baddy gets away with whatever they really want...

Anyway, I have totally digressed from my point, as you can see!

scientists are tools used for political gains
Science has given us more wrongs than rights so far.
Its not a bad thing, like religion..not a bad thing, its only the people that make it bad..that can be applied to everything really...
Guns dont kill people, death kills people! lol
the gun is a tool, used for good or bad, the user is the issue.
the scientisit is eesentially a tool, used for good purpose or bad
I agree nature generally does at times cough out mistakes, but survival of the fittest and natural environment and climatic issues generally ensures these traits are weaned out of the genetic pool.
With humans, we cant be used as an example fairly becuase we do it to ourseves. We are the single most captive bred entity on the planet, we suffer very little environmental and planetry conditions, we condition the planet to our needs and likings regardless of the detrimental effects as the consequence.
We keep the sick and ill alive, and they remain in the gene pool, which again opens up many problems..humans are aflicted by insane numbers of different problems. not sayingthats wrong..but if you think about that over the long haul of time, its not good
Science is a tool, the people that fund the science are the issue.
With a tool so powerful much responsibility is neccessary to sustain witout negative issues. It never happens like that due to human error.
N too true, good ideas take little sway to be a bad idea, and principals of the concept change from light to dark.
Again with killer bees, they are a brilliant idea in theory, but when you get such an advanced hybrid, and bloody morons 'qualified scientists' looking after it, your gonna have problems..always happens, human nature.

__________________

Interesting thoughts there, mate.

Steve

Most fish dont survive the proccess of tatooing from what ive heard, its done with lasers rather than needles. BioIlluminescence is done as an embryo however. Personally id love to have bits of me that glowed in the dark, would great to have a tatoo that did that or a lightsaber.....VROOOOM.

__________________

lucifus@hotmail.com - feel free to add.

We'd save fumbling around, for one thing....

Btw, while I fully understand why people get all uber cautious over this, I think, like it or not, there would be a market for genetically modified inverts, be that colourations, or something even more dramatic.

I bet that there are even a few on here who would privately pay top dollar for some sort of unique T that had been 'created', as long as it was healthy and fed well.

As 25% of all wildlife has become extinct in three decades, man can play a part in redressing the balance, perhaps by creating new species, to replace those which industrialisation killed off?

Or science could use the DNA of an extinct species, to bring them back into the cycle of life, all of those things, if done in a controlled manner, could be positives...