X-Message-Number: 28190
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 06:36:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: human screener <>

Subject: Re: Times (UK) article-- DNA screen-- paradox---anthony--ejay--writing 
style--DNA blacklist

Backtrack link (This link will step you back to the
previous post in this thread where you will find a
link to the post previous to THAT thread and so on).
[11] http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=28187

	In my last post, I made a conclusion and indicated I
was finished. And I am-- but then Anthony tried to
take a parting shot [10 ] and missed by such a wide
margin that  I thought I would at least help him aim
his shot a little better. Maybe we can assist him in
developing a better case against my paradox.
	Anthony's final shot was that my line of reasoning
would mean that we keep zygotes that have DNA for
cystic fibrosis-- but this isn't at all valid because
Mark himself doesn't have cystic fibrosis and it was
Mark I used as my initial example of someone who
supports a medical strategy that would have eliminated
him had he himself been subjected to it.  Aside from
the issue of what to do with a zygote with cystic
fibrosis, my paradox is found in Mark supporting a
zygote elimination program in which he likely has DNA
strands in common with the London lab zygotes. That
was my point. And that was my only point. My argument
does not attack abortions, or the elimination of
cystic fibrosis by destroying zygotes that have that
gene. It's not the discarding of zygotes that is at
the core of my point. It's the existence of a a DNA
blacklist that shares DNA in common with Mark, and
Mark's support of that list. Furthermore,  I'm not so
sure the paradox is pointless, as Anthony then says it
is. [10]. 
	Maybe the thing to do is to get a copy of that DNA
blacklist to see what sequences they're actually
trying to eliminate. Since the Zygote Screening
Paradox depends so precisely on that list-- and its
likely cross-reference with Marks's DNA due to it's
extensiveness, my next step would be to claim that a
further examination of the list would be in order--
and perhaps a paring down of the list so that it's not
so draconian. After all, a fertility lab blacklist
could easily be expanded to include 60,000 traits and
then 6 million traits and used by a new globalist
government to widen the circle of blacklisting of DNA
everywhere using the pretext that it's protecting
mankind from disease-- when in fact it is,
effectively, a massive eugenics program. The precursor
for this action can possibly be found in corporate
plantseed ownership, control and DNA modification--
for profit. Applying the principles of plants to
humans in this way would lead to the H.G.Wells Brave
New World future where we have various grades of
 humans , manufactured for specific functions and
cognitive traits.  The said  messy  elimination of 6
million people in the 1940's would be tidied up so
that the elimination of 6 million DNA strands from the
human genome would be relatively bloodless  war ...  a
DNA war of microscopic proportions but every bit as
devastating to mankind as the big, loud horrible ones.
If Anthony wants to take a valid parting shot,  he
ought to aim at the implications of a DNA blacklist as
I just described. 
	As far as his claim that he wasn't finished with his
thread-- well technically he doesn't have a thread. He
had no links in his post-- so it's not technically a
thread and it's therefore impractical to find his
previous posts. My post, however, is technically a
thread because it has a back link at the top that
takes you to my yet-previous post with attendent
reference links and so on, to the beginning of the
this argument. 

[10] http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=28188

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=28190