given that disease and illness kill just as many people as anything else on this planet it seems to be a good way to go. the advancement of one civilization benefits everyone in a lot of ways and it will continue to do so until the most advanced civilization decides they can live without everyone else and destroys all around them. as people the possibilities for this type of thing is pretty good lol.

Evolving in the wrong direction I believe is the right concept.

Well yes, we will all kill each other eventually, but I don't think that's too far away from now. But if we do continue to cure human diseases, more will start up. Like I said earlier, as we advance, our enemies keep getting smaller.

if we create a perfect immune system and basic genetic map to promote a healthy life than new diseases will be cured along the way. none of this changes the fact that natural disasters/wars/everyday accidents will continue to do what they've always done..kill people. only in a perfect world would someone be able to control every aspect of their lives.

I'm not saying that the average day factors will be removed, but who's to say that humans couldn't stop those too? All I'm saying is that if we end the disease factors humans death rate will be far out numbered by birth rates, unless we can regulate that too. Even with the average deaths of car accidents and what not, they will not increase to compensate for the loss of lives due to disease/virus factors.

which birth regulation would come into play for sure since the procedure would be done while they where developing in the womb. also without the need to pour money into things like immunization and treatment for current conditions anymore that would leave more money open to focus on the rest of the problems.

If we get too advanced for our own good, it doesn't matter what we do. And who's to say since all this research is being done, and we advance as we do, that we won't even have the possibility to die in car accidents or slips and falls and what not? We don't really need to cure everything, since it is there for a reason, whatever it may be. And if we alter a baby while development, that could in fact modify the way it develops as well, causing physical deformations not related to genes.

there is no such thing as too much technological advancement. and even removing the ability to die in what today would be fatal changes nothing. humans are already advanced to the point where we are living too long for current sustainability with current methods. further advancement does nothing but try to help the problem at hand in many ways.

Humans brought that problem upon them selves with technological advancement, did they not? Therefore who is to say that we will ever catch up to ourselves?

What we create is evolving, but is the human itself truely evolving? I don't think so.


E.J. Pratt
From: E.J. Pratt: Complete Poems. ed. Sandra Djwa and R.G. Moyles. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989.

From stone to bronze, from bronze to steel
Along the road-dust of the sun,
Two revolutions of the wheel
From Java to Geneva run.

The snarl Neanderthal is worn
Close to the smiling Aryan lips,
The civil polish of the horn
Gleams from our praying finger tips.

The evolution of desire
Has but matured a toxic wine,
Drunk long before its heady fire
Reddened Euphrates or the Rhine.

Between the temple and the cave
The boundary lies tissue thin:
The yearlings still the altars crave
As satisfaction for a sin.

The road goes up, the road goes down —
Let Java or Geneva be —
But whether to the cross or crown,
The path lies through Gethsemane.