Report, edit, etc...Posted by Kame on 2005-07-04 at 00:21:27
Zombie Dogs
I will quote what someone else said, to some up my opinions on this matter: "When man plays God it scares me."
Any thoughts? Do you think it could work on humans?
I will quote what someone else said, to some up my opinions on this matter: "When man plays God it scares me."
Any thoughts? Do you think it could work on humans?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by warhammer40000 on 2005-07-04 at 00:24:31
Sweet jesus, you could scare a little child to death with this! 
Anyway, in some amount of time, I think they are going to be able to bring humans back to life. But only some... Meh...
Anyway, your not "playing God." If God lets this be possible, then your not playing him.
Its really weird how they do it though... But i know SOME DAY itll be possible to bring back humans.
Anyway, in some amount of time, I think they are going to be able to bring humans back to life. But only some... Meh...
Anyway, your not "playing God." If God lets this be possible, then your not playing him.
Its really weird how they do it though... But i know SOME DAY itll be possible to bring back humans.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Kame on 2005-07-04 at 00:26:30
Well, that point could be debated, but there is merit in that. I think that quote applies more to what this technology could contribute to in the future.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by warhammer40000 on 2005-07-04 at 00:29:54
In 100-300 years, humans will be able to fly, trust me. Lok at the technological advances in the last 20 years! Unbelievable. Soon, the laws of physics will be broken!
And another thing, Is it possible to kill a deadman twice? Probably... But...
And another thing, Is it possible to kill a deadman twice? Probably... But...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by indecisiveman on 2005-07-04 at 00:36:23
Well, if we can revive people, and KEEP reviving people, two things would result.
a) Having children would be banned because there would be too many people
b) We would starve and be squished without room from everyone alive form the 80's.
Possibly a third choice
c) The reviving method would only be used in certain cases where it was a child who died etc.
a) Having children would be banned because there would be too many people
b) We would starve and be squished without room from everyone alive form the 80's.
Possibly a third choice
c) The reviving method would only be used in certain cases where it was a child who died etc.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by warhammer40000 on 2005-07-04 at 00:37:58
Jesus, were not going to revive thousands of people when we find out! Its going to be limited to... battlefeilds... important people...
Whatever
Whatever
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-07-04 at 00:38:59
Well if you think about it it's not extending people's life as in when they are active. Sure you can suspend him for years, but the person won't be doing anything for that time. If you measure how long the person will be awake for, it will just be a normal life span, because they aren't doing anything to prevent aging.
They will inevitably die of old age. But I guess population would increase because no one will die of unnatural causes.
They will inevitably die of old age. But I guess population would increase because no one will die of unnatural causes.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by indecisiveman on 2005-07-04 at 00:47:32
QUOTE(devilesk @ Jul 3 2005, 08:38 PM)
Well if you think about it it's not extending people's life as in when they are active. Sure you can suspend him for years, but the person won't be doing anything for that time. If you measure how long the person will be awake for, it will just be a normal life span, because they aren't doing anything to prevent aging.
They will inevitably die of old age. But I guess population would increase because no one will die of unnatural causes.
[right][snapback]252026[/snapback][/right]
They will inevitably die of old age. But I guess population would increase because no one will die of unnatural causes.
[right][snapback]252026[/snapback][/right]
Exactly my point. Dieing of old age is VERY rare. Most people die before they are at there max. This is why I said there will be restrictions on this "revival" thing. That is, it will only be used for "important people"(i.e. the president, maybe someone with money, superstars, or anyone who can afford it). I am guessing it will cost a FORTUNE(as do most "scientifical advancements"). I think it's a bad idea, and won't even work.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Felagund on 2005-07-04 at 02:18:41
I think someday people will be able to be kept alive indefinitely through organ transplants and gene implants.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-07-04 at 02:31:07
Hmmm..... This seems really interesting... And no brain damage.... That's amazing... I guess it is a way of putting things in a cryosleep kind of state.... Oh the possiblities........
Report, edit, etc...Posted by jynoh01 on 2005-07-04 at 12:02:32
well, if the dead ARE really brought back to life, won't that be impossible until ALL of the SPECIAL cells are preserved and recovered? I mean, if a person was brought back to life, they would have no blood and therefore die, wouldn't they?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Snake)Ling on 2005-07-04 at 12:10:20
Well, I suppose it wont work EVERY time though. If the body isn't recovered in time, maybe the brain will be damaged from lack of oxygen or such.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Tazzy on 2005-07-04 at 12:31:40
Walking dead huh?
I can bet this will backfire, And sooner or later we shall have "zombies" walknig around, Killnig and eating people.
I can bet this will backfire, And sooner or later we shall have "zombies" walknig around, Killnig and eating people.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-07-04 at 12:35:43
QUOTE(indecisiveman @ Jul 4 2005, 12:47 AM)
Exactly my point. Dieing of old age is VERY rare. Most people die before they are at there max. This is why I said there will be restrictions on this "revival" thing. That is, it will only be used for "important people"(i.e. the president, maybe someone with money, superstars, or anyone who can afford it). I am guessing it will cost a FORTUNE(as do most "scientifical advancements"). I think it's a bad idea, and won't even work.
[right][snapback]252039[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]252039[/snapback][/right]
Well, yea most people don't die of old age exactly, though they die when they are fairly old partly due to their old age. Since they are old they are more susceptible to other diseases and die because of that. Unless that is very rare as well, since isn't the average lifespan like mid 70's or so?
Unless preserving people like that would actually keep the people healthier at an older age, I don't think it would prevent people from dying from diseases when they are old.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lisk on 2005-07-04 at 12:44:30
Dawn of the dead 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by KaboomHahahein on 2005-07-04 at 12:48:55
Can't load the web page or it is loading too slowly.
Reviving the dead won't happen. A lot of people will be against it. And what if they are already decomposed and how do you plan to grow back the things that are gone? Reviving the dead will = chaos. People will want it to revive their relatives and etc. While other people will be fully against it until someone they love dies and want them brought back to life.
Reviving the dead won't happen. A lot of people will be against it. And what if they are already decomposed and how do you plan to grow back the things that are gone? Reviving the dead will = chaos. People will want it to revive their relatives and etc. While other people will be fully against it until someone they love dies and want them brought back to life.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lisk on 2005-07-04 at 12:50:40
yeah, andly only those who have money will revive themselfs/their relatives and the poor/middle class people will still die...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Tazzy on 2005-07-04 at 13:11:11
Thing is when im dead, Im Dead. I dont wanna be brought back to life..... Unless its by a gang og gouls who wnat world conquest and want Tazzy's help!
Report, edit, etc...Posted by PwnPirate on 2005-07-04 at 14:12:45
Did you guys even read the article? They dont get thier head chopped off and sewn back on. The scientists "kill" them so they can be revived at a later time. If it can't last for years (So that ill patients can come back when a cure is discovered) it will still serve a good purpose for preserving a wounded soldier to get them back to a hospital before they die. If someone gets their heart cut out, this method would NOT work, thus disproving all of these quotes.
Side note: doesn't cost a fortune.
You see a lot of these titles are misleading, you have to actually read the article. They were "TECHNICALLY" dead because they didn't have a heartbeat of brain activity after being preserved, they weren't "dead" dead. That dog was probably just angry, not some flesh eating zombie.
Edit: This must be a pretty huge step in medical science, a little more and battlefield medics will be just as effective as StarCraft medics!
Double side note:
QUOTE
Dawn of the dead
QUOTE
Well, if we can revive people, and KEEP reviving people, two things would result.
a) Having children would be banned because there would be too many people
b) We would starve and be squished without room from everyone alive form the 80's.
Possibly a third choice
c) The reviving method would only be used in certain cases where it was a child who died etc.
a) Having children would be banned because there would be too many people
b) We would starve and be squished without room from everyone alive form the 80's.
Possibly a third choice
c) The reviving method would only be used in certain cases where it was a child who died etc.
QUOTE
Exactly my point. Dieing of old age is VERY rare. Most people die before they are at there max. This is why I said there will be restrictions on this "revival" thing. That is, it will only be used for "important people"(i.e. the president, maybe someone with money, superstars, or anyone who can afford it). I am guessing it will cost a FORTUNE(as do most "scientifical advancements"). I think it's a bad idea, and won't even work.
Side note: doesn't cost a fortune.
QUOTE
Can't load the web page or it is loading too slowly.
Reviving the dead won't happen. A lot of people will be against it. And what if they are already decomposed and how do you plan to grow back the things that are gone? Reviving the dead will = chaos. People will want it to revive their relatives and etc. While other people will be fully against it until someone they love dies and want them brought back to life.
Reviving the dead won't happen. A lot of people will be against it. And what if they are already decomposed and how do you plan to grow back the things that are gone? Reviving the dead will = chaos. People will want it to revive their relatives and etc. While other people will be fully against it until someone they love dies and want them brought back to life.
You see a lot of these titles are misleading, you have to actually read the article. They were "TECHNICALLY" dead because they didn't have a heartbeat of brain activity after being preserved, they weren't "dead" dead. That dog was probably just angry, not some flesh eating zombie.
Edit: This must be a pretty huge step in medical science, a little more and battlefield medics will be just as effective as StarCraft medics!
Double side note:
QUOTE
Tests show they are perfectly normal, with no brain damage.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-07-04 at 14:25:29
I read the article, they just basically drain the person of their blood and replace it with an ice-cold solution. It basically preserves them.
I guess it "could" help with things like people getting severely injured and have had a lot of trauma, maybe if someone did get their heart cut out they would be preserved until a donor heart is available. Who knows.
I guess it "could" help with things like people getting severely injured and have had a lot of trauma, maybe if someone did get their heart cut out they would be preserved until a donor heart is available. Who knows.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by EzDay281 on 2005-07-04 at 14:34:27
I would like to mention that, even if technology advanced enough to revive ""dead" dead" as Jet_Blast called it, it would probably damage the body to do so, so that anymore than say 3 times and your body will just be too degraded to work anymore without some major next-2-decade-sergery.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by indecisiveman on 2005-07-04 at 14:49:58
QUOTE
You see a lot of these titles are misleading, you have to actually read the article. They were "TECHNICALLY" dead because they didn't have a heartbeat of brain activity after being preserved, they weren't "dead" dead. That dog was probably just angry, not some flesh eating zombie.
If someone doesn't have a heartbeat or there brain doesn't work they are very much so dead...unless you're saying we can live without those "small" organs.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by PwnPirate on 2005-07-04 at 15:34:48
QUOTE
If someone doesn't have a heartbeat or there brain doesn't work they are very much so dead...unless you're saying we can live without those "small" organs.
I'm saying that the dogs were "killed" by the scientists and that you can't bring some old corpse that wasn't "killed" by the scientists back to life.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by indecisiveman on 2005-07-04 at 20:20:55
QUOTE(Jet_Blast54 @ Jul 4 2005, 11:34 AM)
I'm saying that the dogs were "killed" by the scientists and that you can't bring some old corpse that wasn't "killed" by the scientists back to life.
[right][snapback]252634[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]252634[/snapback][/right]
Eh? And why not? I don't think anybody is going to go gravedigging to bring backa love one who died in the year 1826. We are talking recent deaths.(i.e. a kid dies on a bike. His family affords the "process" and bring him back) Why can't scientists do that?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by The_Shattered_moose on 2005-07-04 at 20:29:03
I thought that article was extremly misleading, as theres no way we will get "zombie dogs", those dogs are the same thing as people who almost drowned and were ressusitated (how ever you spell that), they called them zombies, yet many people have been technically "dead", but brought back to life with a shock to the heart, theres no real difference between that and this. The way the article presented it, they made it sound like we were going to have crazy evil flesh eating zombies running around, trust me, THAT WON'T HAPPEN.