You have all seen Jurassic Park, right? The first one, before the inevitable sequel weariness set in. Lets look at one of the scenes that, to me, was incredibly powerful. The one where they find the nest of hatched eggs in the park. Hatched, despite every dinosaur on the island being bred to be female.
Sure, there was some rather pseudoscientific and not terribly convincing claptrap about transexual frogs, to explain how it happened, but that was not the point. It was a time of rather intense techno fear, as is shown by Malcolm's line "Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should."
Sound familiar? You hear it nearly every day, in one form or another. Stem cell research, the LHC, genetic engineering, climate change, even advances in computer technology, they all eventually bump themselves hard against the ones that say "Man shall go thus far and no further." The arbiters of what is and is not acceptable, mostly ruled by their own fears, blindness and hatreds. The shrill, loud ones, newsworthy precisely because they are so shrill and loud. Extremists. The ones who, back in our dim and distant past, probably rejected the idea of growing grain in one place instead of trying to find it growing wild as immoral and against the will of the Gods.
You know what? Scientists agonise over this stuff, and it never gets reported. Sure, they talk about and try to discover if something is actually possible, but in the literature and conferences all over the world, the major emphasis is on should they do it.
They live here too, you know, and have to suffer for any bad decisions just as much as the rest of us. And they, the same as anyone who is an expert in their field, know exactly how much they don't know. It makes them cautious. Careful. Attentive of their responsibilities to the rest of us.
And we really do know nothing about nearly everything, but especially about the living, breathing world we occupy and sometimes enjoy. We expected the Gulf to be poisoned for years by the BP oil spill. Microorganisms have already eaten the entire spill, feeding the fish stocks and keeping the entire ecosystem alive. Last December, everyone knew that arsenic was a deadly poison to all Earth organisms. Until they found one that actually uses it in it's metabolic pathways. Three days ago, everyone bioscientist knew, without the shadow of a doubt, that polychlorinated biphenyls were totally toxic to life if they accumulated. Until they found a fish in the Hudson river that has evolved an immunity to it. The list goes on and on. Yet I bet, unless it is your own personal interest, all three of those links will be a surprise or shock to you.
In the words of Carl Sagan, "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."
Not a good idea at all, especally when the ones that do know a bit are directed, funded and instructed by the ones that don't.It is a true pity that the only organised body on the planet who actually listens to the concerns and ethical dilemma's of the scientists is the Vatican.
Or, if you prefer a film quote to finish: "Life will always find a way." Get used to it. It is a marvelous world we live in. Just maybe think of spending a bit of time learning how it works, eh?
Sure, there was some rather pseudoscientific and not terribly convincing claptrap about transexual frogs, to explain how it happened, but that was not the point. It was a time of rather intense techno fear, as is shown by Malcolm's line "Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should."
Sound familiar? You hear it nearly every day, in one form or another. Stem cell research, the LHC, genetic engineering, climate change, even advances in computer technology, they all eventually bump themselves hard against the ones that say "Man shall go thus far and no further." The arbiters of what is and is not acceptable, mostly ruled by their own fears, blindness and hatreds. The shrill, loud ones, newsworthy precisely because they are so shrill and loud. Extremists. The ones who, back in our dim and distant past, probably rejected the idea of growing grain in one place instead of trying to find it growing wild as immoral and against the will of the Gods.
You know what? Scientists agonise over this stuff, and it never gets reported. Sure, they talk about and try to discover if something is actually possible, but in the literature and conferences all over the world, the major emphasis is on should they do it.
They live here too, you know, and have to suffer for any bad decisions just as much as the rest of us. And they, the same as anyone who is an expert in their field, know exactly how much they don't know. It makes them cautious. Careful. Attentive of their responsibilities to the rest of us.
And we really do know nothing about nearly everything, but especially about the living, breathing world we occupy and sometimes enjoy. We expected the Gulf to be poisoned for years by the BP oil spill. Microorganisms have already eaten the entire spill, feeding the fish stocks and keeping the entire ecosystem alive. Last December, everyone knew that arsenic was a deadly poison to all Earth organisms. Until they found one that actually uses it in it's metabolic pathways. Three days ago, everyone bioscientist knew, without the shadow of a doubt, that polychlorinated biphenyls were totally toxic to life if they accumulated. Until they found a fish in the Hudson river that has evolved an immunity to it. The list goes on and on. Yet I bet, unless it is your own personal interest, all three of those links will be a surprise or shock to you.
In the words of Carl Sagan, "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."
Not a good idea at all, especally when the ones that do know a bit are directed, funded and instructed by the ones that don't.It is a true pity that the only organised body on the planet who actually listens to the concerns and ethical dilemma's of the scientists is the Vatican.
Or, if you prefer a film quote to finish: "Life will always find a way." Get used to it. It is a marvelous world we live in. Just maybe think of spending a bit of time learning how it works, eh?
I love it! Just last night I was watching a show from around 2006 where scientists had discovered, by working with rats, the chemical in the brain responsible for creating and retaining memory. No sooner had this news been released that the scientists began receiving emails from people who had been so traumatized by some experience that they were begging for the scientists to use this discovery to erase their memories. Thus began the discussion on, now that we know this, what do we do with it? And should we do anything with it? Thought provoking stuff. Thanks for the intelligent article.
Thank you for this, MM.
We need more optimists in this world, and less fear-mongering.
This really appeals to me. thanks for posting. It's true for things like medical research. Some people go on asking how cancer isn't cured yet given how much money is put toward research but to me it makes perfect sense.
Also, I have never trolled on a comment before but I thought it might be fun to try. There is no single chemical in the brain that is entirely responsible for creating and retaining memories. If you are talking about glutamate then yes of course it is involved but it's also involved in many other things and is only part of how memories are created. Also to this day scientists cannot erase memories short of actually making a lesion the brain. Now I apologize for that as it does not apply to the discussion, re-read the first sentence of this paragraph. haha
Yawn. Is this a leftover term paper from college? Utterly irrelevant to this site. Stop trying to impress us and write about things that matter.
Thanks.
The beauty of this job is I get to blog about things I like and find interesting.
I refuse to stick to sex, relationships and "does my a*s look big in this" for the blog posts, as I usually make the assumption that my readers are intelligent people, with a wide range of interests. Some of which you won't share.
Sex, relationships and "does my ass look fat in this" are the reasons people come to this site, so don't look down on us too much. We are your raison d'etre. I doubt many here care about polychlorinated biphenyls.
Assuming the readers are intelligent and have an awareness of world issues is looking down on them? You really do have a low opinion of people, don't you?
The original Funny Guy and Reformed Player are both gone.. and now we have to deal with some wannabe blogger who thinks himself worldly? If I wanted to know more about issues in science and around the world, I would read my latest Time subscription or look it up on Google. What you don't seem to understand is that this site is a place for people who are looking for relationship advice. At least try to write on something that is relevant to relationships. If it wasn't for Chic Geek and Smart Ass I wouldn't even be here.
I have to agree with MM on the above comments! obviously you don't understand the wisdom behind this.. if u need it laid out for u, one way you could interpret it is, " when you think yr bf/gf left you and its the end of the world and theres no more hope or reason to live because you thought you couldn't possibly breathe.. somehow life finds a way to new doors and opportunites, and if u take them and stop being a close minded dumbass, you'll walk through those doors and realize, OMgosh... there is life around the corner .. "
try getting out some more, it might help your comprehension skills.
Life is far bigger than your piddly relationship problems. Thank you mystery man for writing this! Guyspeak should be more than just stupid questions about makeup and boy problems. I think getting a guys perspective on the important stuff is the best part of this site!
So....should we just not take care to avoid oil spills, not work to reverse climate change, and start putting countless lives in jeopardy in the name of research because "life will just find a way" to fix it?
Geez louise. There IS a line between "can" and "should." Common sense tells us that.
There's optimism and then there's full-on raging naïveté.
The line between can and should changes every day as the world changes. I loved this blog, and most of your expecially when they cover matters that matter, whether they be of science or addiction. I found this site looking for advice. I've stayed because I love the voices of the authors, nomatter what they're talking about.
I appreciate the occasional non-guy-centric, serious note!!
Also, as a scientist myself, I can tell you that learning something new, something no one has ever known before is amazing. The drive to know more, to learn how this world of ours works, keeps many of us working (and working and working.. you have no idea how long it took before someone could publish the paper that led to that blurb you heard in the news...)
As far as the ethics, its something we wrestle with. It can be difficult to evaluate, especially when a project has such potential for both good and less palatable uses. Not to mention the resources that get used in the research. When I think of the number of animals that have been used in the name of my own research, research designed to learn more about them in order to protect them, I cringe. It's not something I enjoy reflecting on. And I can only imagine what it must be like for research with higher stakes than mine.
Didn't mean for this to become a lecture, just thought it might be interesting for some to see what was going on in the mind of one of those crazy scientists!
thank u my mysteryman---i can read btween lines very well evidently--i thank u--u nswered me beautifully, some mothers eat their young-lol--couldn't resist saying that--thanks again--muggsey