In article: <9502131336.AA10096 at moe.rice.edu> mrg at RICE.EDU (Mark Gardner)
writes:
>> Response to Patrick's note:
>>> >From: "Patrick O'Neil" <patrick at corona>
> >Subject: Re: Attitudes to life extension via genetic engineering
> >Date: Sun, 12 Feb 1995 15:18:11 -0700
>>> >I have spent a lot of time considering the possibilities of life
> >extension mediated by genetic engineering or, more likely, biological
> >manipulation. I cannot deny an attraction to a much longer youth filled
> >with ever more experiences and learning (perhaps a few Ph.D's?) but...
>> >Conversely, I have considered the wideer ramifications of such
> >manipulations and capabilities and have come to the conclusion that
> >significant life extension in general would be disastrous.
>> ***** pages and pages taken out **********
>>> >Fisheries are overfished, and arable land is limited. Where does
> >the food come from?
>>>> Pat, get a life........you are assuming that all of the people that are
now
> dying in the prime of their life would somehow be worthless if they kept
on
> living. Think of the millions and millions of well educated experience
> people who fade away just when we could use them the most. These people
have
> gone through the burden of education, paying for their house, raising
> children. What a cheap resource to find a rocket scientist or something
> without having the expense of training one. What if Einstein or Feynman
were
> still alive.
>> On the other hand we could use a few less whining liberals.
Nice one!
Why should A die just to make room for B.
A child was once asked what he would ask God. The reply was:
Why do you make more people when you don't look after those you have got?
--
Sincerely, ****************************************
* Publisher of Longevity Report *
John de Rivaz * Fractal Report *
* details on request *
****************************************
**** What is the point of life if it ends in death? ****
