Re: [nanotech] Re: Perhaps someone could help me with this...
- --- lynx chunn <lynx_the_immortal2003@...> wrote:
> well thats possible but they would have to be trainedYou're joking, right? Or hanging out with Greg Bear too much.
> once they were made or programmed to find weak pionts
> in the bones. but it could also start to think on its
> own and try to make its and the test subject immune to
> almost every desise in the world and also try to find
> a way to addapt ur test subject to what ever else it
> could like being able to breathe under water or be
> able to take the pressure of a 10,000 ft under the
There is less chance of nanobes conspiring against us than bacteria. They
are, necessarily, a very simple form of life. They may not even reproduce
through what we consider the complete DNA sequence, but perhaps use RNA
itself, like our most distant first-life ancestors.
Liberty will not descend to a people; a people must raise themselves to
liberty; it is a blessing that must be earned before it can be
enjoyed. --Charles Colton
AIM/Yahoo/AOL Instant Messenger: KazVorpal
ICQ#: 1912557 MSN Messenger: KazVorpal@...
- and soldiers should die because tony blair is a crap
i am sorry KAZ but i do not agree.. we learn because
we can. we design for th task, we evolve not destroy..
survival is the end game for production, betterment
such for study..
u always jump to say i am anti-tech etc.. i am one of
nanos best / better allies.. we dont want gm trees, we
dont need them,,, there are plenty of reasons, mostly
concerning pure science/ best practice and integrity
within th natural world..
i am suprised to find pro-gm tree support on a nano
list, cos i thought it meant you were clever and
future designery types, not a bunch of rank closing
sales b***h**.. gm crops lose money and damage th
env.. is that good for science? commercial or pure?
wake up KAZ.. there is a beautiful future of
potential.. we can also lose everything much easier
than you seem to think..
> Support our troops: Get them out of Iraqsupport our troops! bring them home now!
arrest bush and blair! try them for war crimes!
--- KAZ <kazvorpal@...> wrote:
> --- Roderick Mc Carthy <lifestation2004@...>
> > the point to this debate was infact that we dont
> > gmtrees. not that argument over carbon weighting
> > across the scale.. i agree that the carbon in the
> > system is not a threat to the envronment in as
> much as
> > historical carbon is a threat.. and that blue
> > algea are a bennificial life form with a crux
> > in the eco system.. things are delicate..
> > say no to gm trees!
> That sounds like a damned technophobic argument to
> me. Which is a bit
> strange, on a nanotech list. That we do not need a
> new technology is not
> evidence that we shouldn't /use/ the new technology.
> We should use genetically modified trees because we
> find them useful.
> Support our troops: Get them out of Iraq
> AIM/Yahoo/AOL Instant Messenger: KazVorpal
> ICQ#: 1912557 MSN Messenger: KazVorpal@...
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> $4.98 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
> The Nanotechnology Industries mailing list.
> "Nanotechnology: solutions for the
> Yahoo! Groups Links
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com