Governments of U.S and China already perfected Human genetic engineering for military.

I don't have any evidence, but I have read a ton of articles on Los Alamos genetic experiment on alien/human hybrids. I think the governments of U.S and probably china too can greatly enhance a humans Intelligence and physical abilities, but just a kept it very top secret. With all the new genetic engineering of humans articles from the 1990's to 2013 is the government kinda see how the public reacts to this highly advanced technology. A lot of experts on genetic engineering of humans say it will be decades before the technology will be used on humans, but I think the government has been doing for years secretly at Deep underground military bases were The Grey aliens have been experimenting on human genetics. When do anyone think this technology will be given to humans? Maybe the early 2020's? Or maybe you will have to join the military to get it for now?

I don't have any evidence

Not the best way to start off a thread....If you cannot bring any evidence to the party, you will get blasted on here.
On topic: I thing the worlds future wars will have less to do with humans, and more to do with drones and robots...just my two cents.

well they obviously didn't use it on any of our recent politicians.

There is nothing new to it.

The British SAS also have tools that enhance their physical abilities to fight.

reply to post by Militarywarfare


Yes, they do. Thier tools are extreme training , and all the experience they bring to the table, never mind being familiarised with all manner of weapons from all kinds of different countries. Thats it.

The only thing humans are capable of perfecting is arrogance.

reply to post by Sly1one


says the arrogant sounding human...

how long ago did the 6 million dollar man come out? universal soldier?

this tech was perfected long ago

edit replied to wrong thread, thought this was about the invisibily cloak, corrected now

reply to post by DylanShaft17


Genetic experimentation can happen, and likely does happen, without you ever even knowing. It is called "retroviruses".

On that topic....about 13 years ago I had a really bad case of the flu. REALLY bad. I slept for a week. My wife would wake me when my nail beds were blue. I would wake long enough to guzzle down a 32oz Gator Aid, take some medications, pee, and then go back to sleep. Before this viral infection I had been a minimum wage worker, typically working in nursing homes, etc.

After the fever....well, it is 13 years later and I am a CFO, without having any real college education. Something happened with that flu. I came out of it far better with pretty much all cognitive and logic based thinking. My memory retention is ridiculous when compared to prior.

This is how I believe evolution works. "Mutations" are typically, IMO, driven by viral infections.

Originally posted by Sly1one
The only thing humans are capable of perfecting is arrogance.

Nothing more than a pithy statement for the sake of feigned disgust.

I would be interested in hearing you defend that statement. PROTIP: you can't....its a broad brush statement.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by Sly1one
The only thing humans are capable of perfecting is arrogance.

Nothing more than a pithy statement for the sake of feigned disgust.

I would be interested in hearing you defend that statement. PROTIP: you can't....its a broad brush statement.

defend it? do you have evidence of humans perfecting anything other than the ILLUSION they have perfected something? By all means show me a "perfected" product of humans...

I fear this will lead ultimately to semantics but perfection is without flaw...humans themselves are rampant with flaw...logically perfection would escape a flawed nature...

My disgust is in the arrogance of claiming perfection when one knows it cannot be had but to also delve into areas such as genetics and claim perfection when there is no reference to make such a claim...

the claim of "perfection" itself only validates the arrogance I am talking about...

reply to post by Sly1one


I think you are correct. It is semantics. The OP is using the term "perfected" in a metaphorical sense. I think if you challenged the intent of the use of the word, you would like end up getting something like, "They got really, really good at it".

For sure, this intent was evident to the entirety of the audience. Including yourself. Why you chose to ignore it to instead make that comment? I could only guess. And it really doesn't matter.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Sly1one

 

I think you are correct. It is semantics. The OP is using the term "perfected" in a metaphorical sense. I think if you challenged the intent of the use of the word, you would like end up getting something like, "They got really, really good at it".

For sure, this intent was evident to the entirety of the audience. Including yourself. Why you chose to ignore it to instead make that comment? I could only guess. And it really doesn't matter.

I understand it was used in a metaphorial sense...maybe I was out of bounds with my comment or at least should have elaborated on it further than I did. Poor communication on my part.

My feigned disgust is due to the fact that "perfected" by many gets taken out of metaphorical context at face value and becomes the standard by which we opporate. For example GMO's....perfected is a long ways off from "pretty damn close" and I would imagine the same would be done here with human genetics.

See when dealing with genetics they may know and understand how to manipulate them for whatever purpose but there is NO WAY for them to know the consequences of such things on an evolutionary scale. My comment was made in fustration to this apparen't naiveity in regards to manipulating the genome in living creatures especially humans.

but you are correct in a sense that my comment in question was more our of fustration on my end than directly anything the OP said or was implying. I should have elaborated further than a one liner and was called out on it appropriately.

However...I still think the validity of my initial statement remains true in most regards but in this regard it was nit picky semantics via fustration that I didn't clreatly explain.