﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Need for Heretics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-need-for-heretics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-need-for-heretics/</link>
	<description>Serving The Intelligent Design Community</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:59:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: antg</title>
		<link>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-need-for-heretics/comment-page-1/#comment-28462</link>
		<dc:creator>antg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:22:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/939#comment-28462</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Intelligent design will become an essential science in the future whether people like it or not.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Say the authorities suspect that some GM tropical fish mentioned by Dyson have been released by a misguided soul into a natural reef environment. Say they are concerned that these invasive species will outcompete the natives and therefore upset the ecological balance. Assuming that the differences are not obvious, what methods will they use to distinguish the modified fish from the originals? In other words, how will they detect design?
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;b&gt;I&#039;ve mentioned &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.foresight.org/EOC/&quot;&gt;this book&lt;/a&gt; many times before.  Among other things it addresses how to control nano-engineering technology.  Genetic engineering is nano-technology through commandeering the self-replicating assemblers that mother nature provided for us.  Being able to reprogram existing organismal genomes for fun and profit is the big milestone event in the coming age of nano-technology.  Once that has been accomplished it&#039;s a simple matter to reprogram bacteria to build things out of materials more durable than protein.  Imagine bacteria that can build a house to specifcation out of pure carbon with atomic precision.  Carbon obtained from the atmosphere and energy obtained from sunlight.  It&#039;s physically possible.  The only thing preventing such a thing is we can&#039;t yet reprogram bacteria to do things like that - but the day is fast approaching.  Of course the same technology that will make it possible for this also makes it possible to build hideously destructive things too.  Controlling this technology is a monumental concern and substantial portion of the 1986 seminal tome on nano-technology (referenced above) discusses how that control might be implimented. -ds &lt;/b&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Intelligent design will become an essential science in the future whether people like it or not.</p>
<p>Say the authorities suspect that some GM tropical fish mentioned by Dyson have been released by a misguided soul into a natural reef environment. Say they are concerned that these invasive species will outcompete the natives and therefore upset the ecological balance. Assuming that the differences are not obvious, what methods will they use to distinguish the modified fish from the originals? In other words, how will they detect design?
</p>
<p><b>I&#8217;ve mentioned <a href="http://www.foresight.org/EOC/">this book</a> many times before.  Among other things it addresses how to control nano-engineering technology.  Genetic engineering is nano-technology through commandeering the self-replicating assemblers that mother nature provided for us.  Being able to reprogram existing organismal genomes for fun and profit is the big milestone event in the coming age of nano-technology.  Once that has been accomplished it&#8217;s a simple matter to reprogram bacteria to build things out of materials more durable than protein.  Imagine bacteria that can build a house to specifcation out of pure carbon with atomic precision.  Carbon obtained from the atmosphere and energy obtained from sunlight.  It&#8217;s physically possible.  The only thing preventing such a thing is we can&#8217;t yet reprogram bacteria to do things like that &#8211; but the day is fast approaching.  Of course the same technology that will make it possible for this also makes it possible to build hideously destructive things too.  Controlling this technology is a monumental concern and substantial portion of the 1986 seminal tome on nano-technology (referenced above) discusses how that control might be implimented. -ds </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick</title>
		<link>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-need-for-heretics/comment-page-1/#comment-28447</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:36:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/939#comment-28447</guid>
		<description>At about the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the Fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:

&quot;A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.

From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship.

&quot;The average age of the world&#039;s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith
From spiritual faith to great courage
From great courage to liberty
From liberty to abundance
From abundance to complacency
From complacency to apathy
From apathy to governmental dependency
From governmental dependency back into bondage.&quot;

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, MN believes the US is now somewhere between the &quot;apathy&quot; and the &quot;complacency&quot; phase of Professor Tyler&#039;s definition of democracy with some 40 percent of the nation&#039;s population already having reached the &quot;governmental dependency&quot; phase. And, Olson adds, the last gasp of any country has been when marriage and the family have taken a back seat to other sexual interests as witness Rome one of the greatest and most-wide spread governments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At about the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the Fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:</p>
<p>&#8220;A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.</p>
<p>From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship.</p>
<p>&#8220;The average age of the world&#8217;s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:</p>
<p>From bondage to spiritual faith<br />
From spiritual faith to great courage<br />
From great courage to liberty<br />
From liberty to abundance<br />
From abundance to complacency<br />
From complacency to apathy<br />
From apathy to governmental dependency<br />
From governmental dependency back into bondage.&#8221;</p>
<p>Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, MN believes the US is now somewhere between the &#8220;apathy&#8221; and the &#8220;complacency&#8221; phase of Professor Tyler&#8217;s definition of democracy with some 40 percent of the nation&#8217;s population already having reached the &#8220;governmental dependency&#8221; phase. And, Olson adds, the last gasp of any country has been when marriage and the family have taken a back seat to other sexual interests as witness Rome one of the greatest and most-wide spread governments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DaveScot</title>
		<link>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-need-for-heretics/comment-page-1/#comment-28437</link>
		<dc:creator>DaveScot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:49:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/939#comment-28437</guid>
		<description>Freeman Dyson is awesome.  Thank you Bill for that wonderful article.  

Dyson Spheres and various spinoffs have been science fiction plot elements for many decades and I first learned of them around 10 years after Dyson wrote the seminal paper on them in 1959.  Here&#039;s some great &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;further reading&lt;/a&gt; on the concept conceived by one of the most delightful scientific iconoclast minds the 20th century produced - Freeman Dyson&#039;s.

And I had no idea Dyson has no PhD.  You learn something new every day!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Freeman Dyson is awesome.  Thank you Bill for that wonderful article.  </p>
<p>Dyson Spheres and various spinoffs have been science fiction plot elements for many decades and I first learned of them around 10 years after Dyson wrote the seminal paper on them in 1959.  Here&#8217;s some great <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere" rel="nofollow">further reading</a> on the concept conceived by one of the most delightful scientific iconoclast minds the 20th century produced &#8211; Freeman Dyson&#8217;s.</p>
<p>And I had no idea Dyson has no PhD.  You learn something new every day!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: crandaddy</title>
		<link>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-need-for-heretics/comment-page-1/#comment-28334</link>
		<dc:creator>crandaddy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:02:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/939#comment-28334</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s an interesting speech, though I was hoping he would mention Darwin or cosmological fine-tuning.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s an interesting speech, though I was hoping he would mention Darwin or cosmological fine-tuning.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jacktone</title>
		<link>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-need-for-heretics/comment-page-1/#comment-28325</link>
		<dc:creator>jacktone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:36:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/939#comment-28325</guid>
		<description>Wow, interesting fella, that Mr. Dyson. I can agree with his views on global warming and America, but he caught me off guard with the do-it-yourself biotech thing. Hmmm......
Anyway, heretics, go for it!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, interesting fella, that Mr. Dyson. I can agree with his views on global warming and America, but he caught me off guard with the do-it-yourself biotech thing. Hmmm&#8230;&#8230;<br />
Anyway, heretics, go for it!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

