Scientist, Evolutionist, The Scientific World and Everyone Else too..?

Question

If HGT can transfer genetic material to another organism that is not its offspring, why can't we take, lets say the Flatworm or something else that can be split in two without dying, and make real sense of evolution. Instead of waiting millions of years, hell we claim to be the smartest (Well, I'm not THAT smart, but smart enough to think of it) of our primitive ancestors, why are OUR TROOPS coming home confined to wheelchairs or without limbs. (I haven't forgotten about the HGT or the flatworm) I mean if "WE" can fund a war of none of "OUR" concern (I pay my taxes) "WE" can damn show fund research to "OUR AMERICAN SCIENTIST" to dig deep into this matter. I'm pretty sure if they put maggots & leeches inya to cure ya, then why not dwell on this for awhile. I mean come on people. This is not some type of Frankenstein stuff I'm talking about either, this my very well be able to...... So my question is why are we wasting time on small stuff when we can___ (Make evolution work for us!)

For those who don't know and would like to just put out some form of hate, HGT stands for Horizontal Gene Transfer. Also maybe I'm wrong about it but what if Darwin never published his book, or one of the greatist minds of all time, Steven Hawking, if he never put dude on blast then, well read up on him. I'm just asking a question.

Answer 1

There are scientists out there working on that very question. Believe me, the first person to figure out how to regrow limbs in humans would get fame, glory, prizes, cash, and his/her name in the history books. It's not that easy, though, and we have to build up a lot of other knowledge first. We didn't invent the computer earlier because we needed electricity and plastic and, hell, metal and algebra first. We only just got the human genome mapped, and we're going to need a hell of a lot more information before we get to the point of regrowing limbs.

Another problem is the ickiness factor. What you're suggesting is intrinsically tied up with things like stem cell research and human cloning, which a lot of people find icky. We've got a lot of ethical questions to answer about things like that before we'll be able to get large-scale governmental support, especially in the US. The US is so far behind on the stem cell thing right now because the cells were being harvested from embryos, and there's a huge debate raging over whether it's okay to use embryos that are left over from in vitro fertilization. The cloning thing- eugh, that's not even a place to go.

People are smart, but we have to build up our knowledge. The world is far too complicated a place for us to pull advanced genetic techniques out of our butts, and there are important ethical questions to be answered before we go racing willy-nilly into new technology. Nuclear weapons have been around for over fifty years, and we're still nowhere near figuring out how to deal with that whole mess. Cloning? That's going to take a bit longer. I agree, we need to help out amputees, but we also need to be careful about the potential problems that that very noble goal can bring along with it. Not to mention? We don't like genetically engineered food. How are we going to handle part humans/part worms?

Answer 2

Proof is for mathematics. Science deals with evidence. I've seen how creationists "interpret" the evidence to make it support creationism. It can be funny when it's not so stupid that you're banging your head on the desk. No one who uses the old argument about adding information has ever been able to define "information" in a way that makes sense to a scientist. It's just hand-waving that impresses creationists who know nothing about science. Geneticists can point to several ways in which mutations add genetic variety, which is probably what they think "information" is but won't actually say so. Since you're a creationist I'll go ahead and assume that like every other creationist I've ever run into, you have no interest in facts, evidence or logical arguments. You just want to preach. We get tired of writing out long, informational answers only to have them ignored.

Answer 3

Scientists ARE working on horizontal gene transfer for the very purpose which you propose. But it isn't quite as easy as it may sound. The biggest obstacle scientists have to overcome is society, as there are many elements in our current society who believe such research should be stopped. Many labs which could do such work are afraid to do so for fear of angering potential donors who could, by benefit of denying funds, cripple the institution's ability to do any kind of research at all.