1. Post #201
    Gold Member
    bravehat's Avatar
    July 2007
    12,465 Posts
    Why do we want to have kids? well its just a thing culture showed us to do. The same reason why we marry. It also probably has something to do with not wanting to die, so you put your thoughts and genes into another human being. really why do you think some people dont have kids? why do you think some people have abortions?

    Edited:


    3 most people would rather have to see a trend in life and do something over and over then be dead. also since science changes the culture you would still being seeing new things. the rest of the stuff would not apply if you everyone else was immortal
    No we have fucking kids cause it's a hard wired species instinct.

    Seriously, if we didn't have that instinct we wouldn't be here we would have fucking died out.

    Look at the pandas, they don't want to fuck and that is one of the major reasons they are almost extinct, we are the only reason they have survived at all.

    People have abortions because they aren't ready or able to take care of a kid, I know a few people who have had abortions they all said they would keep it if they could, but they just can't cause they aren't fit to take care of a kid.

    And no we don't have kids as our way of surviving, it's to push our genes through to a surviving generation, it's evolution and just because people may not die as often that doesn't mean it will stop, slow down or stagnate.

    PAGE KING MOTHERFUCKERS GOD DAMN I'M AWESOME!!!! :pcgaming:
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United Kingdom Show Events Funny Funny x 2Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  2. Post #202
    Dennab
    June 2010
    7,068 Posts
    No we have fucking kids cause it's a hard wired species instinct.

    Seriously, if we didn't have that instinct we wouldn't be here we would have fucking died out.

    Look at the pandas, they don't want to fuck and that is one of the major reasons they are almost extinct, we are the only reason they have survived at all.

    People have abortions because they aren't ready or able to take care of a kid, I know a few people who have had abortions they all said they would keep it if they could, but they just can't cause they aren't fit to take care of a kid.

    And no we don't have kids as our way of surviving, it's to push our genes through to a surviving generation, it's evolution and just because people may not die as often that doesn't mean it will stop, slow down or stagnate.
    Some people just love children and think they're really cute and yeah

  3. Post #203
    Gold Member
    RayDark's Avatar
    May 2008
    2,652 Posts
    I want to subscribe to bravehat's posts hnnng

  4. Post #204
    Gold Member
    hypno-toad's Avatar
    October 2006
    14,805 Posts
    I don't really want to live longer than 70 years.
    That's a fundamentally stupid thing to say.

    Im making an assumption about your character here, but the only reason you don't want to live forever is because you assume in your lifespan, you will need to:

    - Be born
    - Go to school
    - Get a job
    - Find a home
    - Have kids
    - Retire
    - Die

    And I agree, that's a pretty mundane and linear life.

    But, if the cycle were like this:

    - Be born
    - Go to school
    - Wander around nature and society for a few decades
    - Master an Art or Science
    - Create and innovate
    - Do whatever you want forever

    Life turns from a linear and predictable story, into an immortal sandbox of learning and experience. As of now, the only way to a legacy is to have children, and everything else in life is based on succeeding and repoducing. if YOU were your legacy, and you were LIVING your legacy, then there'd be no need for any of that.

    I think your opinion may change. If your opinion doesn't change, then obviously you have quite a bleak view of your limitations. the only thing that holds me back from doing whatever I want to do, is the fact that I'm going to die, and at that point nothing I ever did or could have done will matter, Immortality would nullify that point.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Canada Show Events Agree Agree x 2 (list)

  5. Post #205
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    No we have fucking kids cause it's a hard wired species instinct.

    Seriously, if we didn't have that instinct we wouldn't be here we would have fucking died out.

    Look at the pandas, they don't want to fuck and that is one of the major reasons they are almost extinct, we are the only reason they have survived at all.

    People have abortions because they aren't ready or able to take care of a kid, I know a few people who have had abortions they all said they would keep it if they could, but they just can't cause they aren't fit to take care of a kid.

    And no we don't have kids as our way of surviving, it's to push our genes through to a surviving generation, it's evolution and just because people may not die as often that doesn't mean it will stop, slow down or stagnate.
    remember when I said sex was a drive? sex makes children but it doesnt have to.
    explain this to me. I dont want to have a child, either does my cousin a lot of my smarter friends also dont want to have kids. are we genetically different? if so how the fuck did this gene pass if we do not reproduce? we will take care of a child once we have it and we will want to have sex which produces the child but genetically we do not have to have a child. thats what sex is for and are genes have not figured out that we can have sex without children.
    pandas do not want to have sex. we do but sex doesnt mean babies for us.
    im sorry for some repetition but you didnt get it last time I posted so im going to say it again

  6. Post #206
    Dennab
    June 2010
    7,068 Posts
    If you don't die then you have no reason to do a lot of shit that society has us do.

  7. Post #207
    Gold Member
    RayDark's Avatar
    May 2008
    2,652 Posts
    Let's all agree on one point, immortality is needed for technological super-advancement within a small amount of generations, yeah?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Show Events Agree Agree x 2 (list)

  8. Post #208
    Gold Member
    Tinter's Avatar
    March 2008
    7,580 Posts
    3 most people would rather have to see a trend in life and do something over and over then be dead. also since science changes the culture you would still being seeing new things. the rest of the stuff would not apply if you everyone else was immortal
    I can see what you mean but you would be having a hard time remembering things. The rest of the stuff still applies even if everybody else is immortal. Time would still be speeding up as you get older, but that's really the only one I can support.

  9. Post #209
    Gold Member
    hypno-toad's Avatar
    October 2006
    14,805 Posts
    Let's all agree on one point, immortality is needed for technological super-advancement within a small amount of generations, yeah?
    Precisely. If immortality were possible, then it would basically place our benchmark in the universe, there would be no need for life, death, or survival, all there would be is accomplishments and aspirations for eternity. Effectively, it's creating true sentience and omnipotence, in a way.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Canada Show Events Friendly Friendly x 1 (list)

  10. Post #210
    Gold Member
    bravehat's Avatar
    July 2007
    12,465 Posts
    remember when I said sex was a drive? sex makes children but it doesnt have to.
    explain this to me. I dont want to have a child, either does my cousin a lot of my smarter friends also dont want to have kids. are we genetically different? if so how the fuck did this gene pass if we do not reproduce? we will take care of a child once we have it and we will want to have sex which produces the child but genetically we do not have to have a child. thats what sex is for and are genes have not figured out that we can have sex without children.
    pandas do not want to have sex. we do but sex doesnt mean babies for us.
    im sorry for some repetition but you didnt get it last time I posted so im going to say it again
    There is a fundamental basic drive that when you meet a fitting person says to you "Look at that person asshole you see her, she's attractive right, go fuck her senseless" If a relationship follows, then there's likely to be a kid.

    The two drives are sort of separate, but interlinked, either way don't know about you but at some point in time I fancy having kids, if you want to let your spunk go to waste, be my guest.

  11. Post #211
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    I can see what you mean but you would be having a hard time remembering things. The rest of the stuff still applies even if everybody else is immortal. Time would still be speeding up as you get older, but that's really the only one I can support.
    well yea but technology would probably help us remember more. not to mention i still think its a better alternative then being dead

  12. Post #212
    Gold Member
    Tinter's Avatar
    March 2008
    7,580 Posts
    That's a fundamentally stupid thing to say.

    Im making an assumption about your character here, but the only reason you don't want to live forever is because you assume in your lifespan, you will need to:

    - Be born
    - Go to school
    - Get a job
    - Find a home
    - Have kids
    - Retire
    - Die

    And I agree, that's a pretty mundane and linear life.

    But, if the cycle were like this:

    - Be born
    - Go to school
    - Wander around nature and society for a few decades
    - Master an Art or Science
    - Create and innovate
    - Do whatever you want forever

    Life turns from a linear and predictable story, into an immortal sandbox of learning and experience. As of now, the only way to a legacy is to have children, and everything else in life is based on succeeding and repoducing. if YOU were your legacy, and you were LIVING your legacy, then there'd be no need for any of that.

    I think your opinion may change. If your opinion doesn't change, then obviously you have quite a bleak view of your limitations. the only thing that holds me back from doing whatever I want to do, is the fact that I'm going to die, and at that point nothing I ever did or could have done will matter, Immortality would nullify that point.
    The problem is that right now, our body is limited. A lot of people at the age of 80 and up after are not well. We need to find cures to diseases and find ways to overcome our limitations. Hope what I'm saying here makes sense. If not just rate me dumb.

  13. Post #213
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    There is a fundamental basic drive that when you meet a fitting person says to you "Look at that person asshole you see her, she's attractive right, go fuck her senseless" If a relationship follows, then there's likely to be a kid.
    unless you use birth control. my point is that if it was genetic then there would not be people like me who dont want to have a child.

  14. Post #214
    Gold Member
    Tinter's Avatar
    March 2008
    7,580 Posts
    well yea but technology would probably help us remember more. not to mention i still think its a better alternative then being dead
    Yeah, you're right. But we have to develop on these points before we get immortality.

  15. Post #215
    Gold Member
    RayDark's Avatar
    May 2008
    2,652 Posts
    So guys, how about we brainstorm some feasible methods of immortality?

    Mine's the whole stem cell breeding and assignment factory implant.

  16. Post #216
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    So guys, how about we brainstorm some feasible methods of immortality?

    Mine's the whole stem cell breeding and assignment factory implant.
    completely replace all your thoughts with nano bots who could have a thought code in them like dna so that no matter how many nanobots are destroyed as long as there is one left it would be able to create others and continue thinking. you would not have a body but your mind would live on forever

  17. Post #217
    Gold Member
    bravehat's Avatar
    July 2007
    12,465 Posts
    unless you use birth control. my point is that if it was genetic then there would not be people like me who dont want to have a child.
    Yeah, it's not genetic, I'm saying that there is a genetic drive to have children.

    Just because there are people without that drive that doesn't mean the whole situation is non genetic, after all genetics aren't the be all and end all, they just mean you are more inclined to act a certain way.

  18. Post #218
    Gold Member
    RayDark's Avatar
    May 2008
    2,652 Posts
    completely replace all your thoughts with nano bots who could have a thought code in them like dna so that no matter how many nanobots are destroyed as long as there is one left it would be able to create others and continue thinking. you would not have a body but your mind would live on forever
    You would be 'dead' since you would lose your conscience, no?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  19. Post #219
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    Yeah, it's not genetic, I'm saying that there is a genetic drive to have children.

    Just because there are people without that drive that doesn't mean the whole situation is non genetic, after all genetics aren't the be all and end all, they just mean you are more inclined to act a certain way.
    and that could be over comed with education meaning that in the future people would not have a billion children while never die causing super over population. even thoug i would agree with dawkins that you are not genetically inclined to have children but to just have sex and take care of children

  20. Post #220
    Gold Member
    hypno-toad's Avatar
    October 2006
    14,805 Posts
    The problem is that right now, our body is limited. A lot of people at the age of 80 and up after are not well. We need to find cures to diseases and find ways to overcome our limitations. Hope what I'm saying here makes sense. If not just rate me dumb.
    Aging is an evolutionary failsafe. The point to existence is reproduction and evolution, and the only reason almost all creatures age, is because death is just as important as birth in the eyes of evolution.

    Take a look at your teenage years. All you do is grow. If you get injured or sick, your body heals at a miraculous rate, your body actually "refreshes" and "repairs" itself for the most part. Between the ages of 1-20, here's no real "aging," there's only development. Your body does that, because it's supposed to. It's not because it's pysically impossible for cellular material to replace and maintain itself, the only reason you age is because you are supposed to die, it's one of the logical steps for the evolutionary and reproductive process. Your cellular materials ages and dies on purpose.

    In case you haven't noticed, humans aren't really evolving anymore; at least not at a significant pace. Humans have created an evolutionary bubble, and adapted artificially to survive in our world. Immortality would be the complete and utter manifestation of that, aging really serves no purpose anymore in human society, now all it's doing is holding us back.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Canada Show Events Agree Agree x 2 (list)

  21. Post #221
    Gold Member
    bravehat's Avatar
    July 2007
    12,465 Posts
    So guys, how about we brainstorm some feasible methods of immortality?

    Mine's the whole stem cell breeding and assignment factory implant.
    Redundant organ systems that cycle through each other every few months then the systems that are inactive are repaired through an upgraded immune system using stem cells to repair damage. Genetic and bioengineering for those who need it, redundant organs would be standard systems as soon as possible (would require a massive shake up in government systems so it's a pipe dream really) and the bioengineering and mechanical type enhancements would be for those who operate in demanding roles such as future colonists and armed forces personnel.

  22. Post #222
    Gold Member
    MrOwn1's Avatar
    February 2008
    3,120 Posts
    and that could be over comed with education meaning that in the future people would not have a billion children while never die causing super over population
    im not sure what you are saying because i can't understand your horrible grammar
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United States Show Events Zing Zing x 1 (list)

  23. Post #223
    SM0K3 B4N4N4's Avatar
    March 2008
    1,574 Posts
    That is fucking crazy. While the idea of immortality is feasible, and may even be possible within our lifetimes, cryogenic freezing and suspended animation is really just a dream.

    its not really just about space exploration, either. Living forever would have many great ramifications, especially for scientists, authors, artists, and engineers. You'd see those types of people perform amazing stuff when they aren't bound to the rules of age, they can gain great wisdom and knowledge and never die with it. death and disabilities are really the only thing that have hampered the greatest minds in our history. Imagine what Albert Einstein would accomplish if he had lived for 2000 years.
    except science isn't carried out by individuals, it's carried out by a collective scientific body in every field. Einstein built on the ideas of others before him, some of which if you go back far enough would have trouble accepting the sort of things he theorized. Same goes with any famous scientist today.

  24. Post #224
    Gold Member
    bravehat's Avatar
    July 2007
    12,465 Posts
    You would be 'dead' since you would lose your conscience, no?
    It's a whole massive kettle of fish that scares the shit out of me, I'll stick with biological immortality not nano-immortality, same problem with quantum teleportation for me, and object is broken down and reconstructed at the other end of the machine, to outside observers it is you, but are you actually you? or did a copy of you get created from blueprints of you saved in a machine?

    If that shit ever happens I'm avoiding it like the plague.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United Kingdom Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  25. Post #225
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    You would be 'dead' since you would lose your conscience, no?
    well if all the data in your brain was stored in the nanobots i would say no

  26. Post #226
    Gold Member
    hypno-toad's Avatar
    October 2006
    14,805 Posts
    Though obviously this is utterly lacking in technical detail, getting rid of aging would be as simple as simply getting rid of the post-teen metabolism change. If one could eliminate the transition between development and aging, then people would effectively be immortal. If you could make the development process simply "hang" at the age of 19 or 20, then your body would continue to refresh and repair itself at the teenage metabolism forever, basically.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Canada Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  27. Post #227
    Gold Member
    RayDark's Avatar
    May 2008
    2,652 Posts
    except science isn't carried out by individuals, it's carried out by a collective scientific body in every field. Einstein built on the ideas of others before him, some of which if you go back far enough would have trouble accepting the sort of things he theorized. Same goes with any famous scientist today.
    Except science CAN be carried out by individuals, what are you talking about, willis?

    Edited:

    It's a whole massive kettle of fish that scares the shit out of me, I'll stick with biological immortality not nano-immortality, same problem with quantum teleportation for me, and object is broken down and reconstructed at the other end of the machine, to outside observers it is you, but are you actually you? or did a copy of you get created from blueprints of you saved in a machine?

    If that shit ever happens I'm avoiding it like the plague.
    Yeah, I wouldn't go near it.

  28. Post #228
    Gold Member
    hypno-toad's Avatar
    October 2006
    14,805 Posts
    except science isn't carried out by individuals, it's carried out by a collective scientific body in every field. Einstein built on the ideas of others before him, some of which if you go back far enough would have trouble accepting the sort of things he theorized. Same goes with any famous scientist today.
    Given thousands of years, Individual efforts will be scaled up tenfold or or more. Einstein Probably learned a lot, and developed a lot of theories and insight during his life. Given 300 years or so he might have simply gained an innate understanding of how things work in the universe, and would have been able to apply that to technological advancement. That's what wisdom is, innate understanding.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Canada Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  29. Post #229
    SM0K3 B4N4N4's Avatar
    March 2008
    1,574 Posts
    For fuck's sake if someone has to remind you again that we can theoretically regenerate our bodies I'm going to punch a small african child in the face.
    you clearly don't have any idea how the female reproductive system works. Females are born with only a certain amount of eggs. Some of those are repaired, some of them are discarded and replaced, but not very often. Unless a female is pregnant a period happens every month getting rid of one of these eggs. Changing the body so it can repair itself more easily and doesn't break down as much is one thing, changing the way our sexual organs work so that women are able to continuously produce eggs is a completely different thing and involves tampering with completely different genes and completely different body processes.

  30. Post #230
    Gold Member
    RayDark's Avatar
    May 2008
    2,652 Posts
    -snip- wait fuck

  31. Post #231
    Harpuia's Avatar
    July 2005
    76 Posts
    I'm all for this, but let's just stop and consider what happens when we stop evolving due to no reproducing.

    All those horrible microbes and bacteria and so on that cause diseases still are.

    We better have spread out across the galaxy and have super-science because we could see some pretty bad pandemics because some ultra evolved bug developed over time to wipe us out.

    The ability to reproduce must be kept intact to avoid that, but at the same time we can't just reproduce to the point of demolishing entire worlds.

    ...But if we do, I guess we can all live in massive ships that devour asteroid fields and smaller stuff for minerals or something.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1Funny Funny x 1 (list)

  32. Post #232
    Gold Member
    RayDark's Avatar
    May 2008
    2,652 Posts
    you clearly don't have any idea how the female reproductive system works. Females are born with only a certain amount of eggs. Some of those are repaired, some of them are discarded and replaced, but not very often. Unless a female is pregnant a period happens every month getting rid of one of these eggs. Changing the body so it can repair itself more easily and doesn't break down as much is one thing, changing the way our sexual organs work so that women are able to continuously produce eggs is a completely different thing and involves tampering with completely different genes and completely different body processes.
    Why not just fuck before 40?

    Edited:

    I'm all for this, but let's just stop and consider what happens when we stop evolving due to no reproducing.

    All those horrible microbes and bacteria and so on that cause diseases still are.

    We better have spread out across the galaxy and have super-science because we could see some pretty bad pandemics because some ultra evolved bug developed over time to wipe us out.
    Except one of the things bravehat mentioned was a constantly heightening immune system, so when the bug needed to infect us to adapt, it would be immunized against and repeat the process again and again.

    And also no air to breathe in space so no way to transition into human blood.

  33. Post #233
    Gold Member
    hypno-toad's Avatar
    October 2006
    14,805 Posts
    I'm all for this, but let's just stop and consider what happens when we stop evolving due to no reproducing.

    All those horrible microbes and bacteria and so on that cause diseases still are.

    We better have spread out across the galaxy and have super-science because we could see some pretty bad pandemics because some ultra evolved bug developed over time to wipe us out.
    If immortality was optional at the cost of sterilization, then Im sure there would be many people who stick around to breed.

  34. Post #234
    LIVE LIKE A WINDRAMMER AS YOU FUCK
    Murkat's Avatar
    June 2010
    5,793 Posts
    There is a problem with that. Say if we humans live an average of 85 years, and we have a population around 6,876,800,000 people, And if they all live 100,000,000,000 years, the earth would run out of resources in an estimated 4,326 years due to reproduction and grand kids being able to say "hi" to their great great great great great great great great great grandpa.

    Get what I'm saying? We all die for a reason.
    Not everyone wants to live forever, and not everyone manages to avoid every fatal accident in their life. Plus, couldn't you just have places that effectively work as suicide booths for people who've grown tired of their immortality?

  35. Post #235
    Gold Member
    RayDark's Avatar
    May 2008
    2,652 Posts
    Not everyone wants to live forever, and not everyone manages to avoid every fatal accident in their life. Plus, couldn't you just have places that effectively work as suicide booths for people who've grown tired of their immortality?
    Yeah you could, it's called normal suicide. Gun to head and boom, your brain is officially dead.

  36. Post #236
    Capn'Underpants's Avatar
    October 2010
    1,111 Posts
    Instead we should research what happens when you die.
    "ok, so for science we are going to kill you and then we need you to tell us what it's like, ok?"
    "ok, but how will I tell you?"
    "Oh, due to breakthroughs in recent science we can keep you technicaly dead but able to be revived at any moment with this new technology for up to 12 hours, usefull for people in hospitle and on lifesupport or something too."
    :science:

  37. Post #237
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    if we could map every single atom of a person we would be able to bring them back to life if they ever died.
    just putting out a hypothesis I thought of

  38. Post #238
    Gold Member
    RayDark's Avatar
    May 2008
    2,652 Posts
    if we could map every single atom of a person we would be able to bring them back to life if they ever died.
    just putting out a hypothesis I thought of
    Wouldn't be the same person. No memories, no thoughts, no conscience...







    Final destination.

  39. Post #239
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    Instead we should research what happens when you die.
    "ok, so for science we are going to kill you and then we need you to tell us what it's like, ok?"
    "ok, but how will I tell you?"
    "Oh, due to breakthroughs in recent science we can keep you technicaly dead but able to be revived at any moment with this new technology for up to 12 hours, usefull for people in hospitle and on lifesupport or something too."
    :science:
    do you really need to do an experiment to see what happens to a person when they die? if you did that test to them it would seem like they never died at all because there brain stopped processing time and when you come back to life it would start again

  40. Post #240
    Gold Member
    RayDark's Avatar
    May 2008
    2,652 Posts
    if we could map every single atom of a person we would be able to bring them back to life if they ever died.
    just putting out a hypothesis I thought of
    Wouldn't be the same person. No memories, no thoughts, no conscience...







    Final destination.