Nab wrote

Lecter wrote

Nab wrote

Lecter wrote

Linear wrote

Sanyo wrote

FKX wrote i was reading about this last night, only down side is they dont know if the cells are weak due to old age or strong due to being revived.

mice are helping us become immortal

But at what cost? they are killing all these mice.

Yes, and what exactly is your point...?

His point is what gives us the right to kill these mice as if our lives are more important than theirs.

Because we are greater than them...

Says who? Us?
That makes sense.

I don't think humans are worth more than any other animal, you and Linear obviously do.
This is one of those topics where debating it really doesn't change anyone's viewpoint so there's not much point.

no, because we have made civilisation, we have created everything what we are using right now. All mice do in their life is try to find food and survive..
Its all about being the apex predator, mice are at the bottom of that chain, humans are at the top. Thats how the world works..

Ants build civilizations as well.
So if we set the bar of living a good life as 'having fun' then should we just kill every person who has a disability preventing them from having fun?

Lecter wrote

Nab wrote

Lecter wrote

Linear wrote

Sanyo wrote

FKX wrote i was reading about this last night, only down side is they dont know if the cells are weak due to old age or strong due to being revived.

mice are helping us become immortal

But at what cost? they are killing all these mice.

Yes, and what exactly is your point...?

His point is what gives us the right to kill these mice as if our lives are more important than theirs.

Because we are greater than them...

Says who? Us?
That makes sense.

I don't think humans are worth more than any other animal, you and Linear obviously do.
This is one of those topics where debating it really doesn't change anyone's viewpoint so there's not much point.

The Lion eats the Gazelle because it's weaker than him. Is he sitting there questioning his morals? No, he's surviving, adapting and making things better for himself.

Do we get annoyed at the shark because he eats fish? No.

What is the difference between eating the animal or using it to our advantage. It's the same thing.

You're putting a low mark on our opinions, and write yours as if it is the correct one - it isn't, there is no correct opinion; it is purely that.

Lecter wrote

Nab wrote

Lecter wrote

Nab wrote

Lecter wrote

Linear wrote

Sanyo wrote

FKX wrote i was reading about this last night, only down side is they dont know if the cells are weak due to old age or strong due to being revived.

mice are helping us become immortal

But at what cost? they are killing all these mice.

Yes, and what exactly is your point...?

His point is what gives us the right to kill these mice as if our lives are more important than theirs.

Because we are greater than them...

Says who? Us?
That makes sense.

I don't think humans are worth more than any other animal, you and Linear obviously do.
This is one of those topics where debating it really doesn't change anyone's viewpoint so there's not much point.

no, because we have made civilisation, we have created everything what we are using right now. All mice do in their life is try to find food and survive..
Its all about being the apex predator, mice are at the bottom of that chain, humans are at the top. Thats how the world works..

Ants build civilizations as well.
So if we set the bar of living a good life as 'having fun' then should we just kill every person who has a disability preventing them from having fun?

You're reading it how you want it to be. He hasn't said anything to do with your comment...

I don't know, after looking through comments it seems like I'm one of the only people who feel this way, but I'd never want to be immortal... The very thought just sounds dreadful, 70-90 years is plenty of time for me personally. Then again the thought of death doesn't really scare me, so I understand why people would like this.

Not to mention overpopulation and outbreaks of illnesses if this were to come about.

HarmfulMushroom wrote I don't know, after looking through comments it seems like I'm one of the only people who feel this way, but I'd never want to be immortal... The very thought just sounds dreadful, 70-90 years is plenty of time for me personally. Then again the thought of death doesn't really scare me, so I understand why people would like this.

To be honest i don't really want to be immortal - however choosing a time (perhaps 'considerably' longer) would be my preference.

I just don't understand how people can accept the food chain then complain about animal testing.

Linear wrote

Lecter wrote

Nab wrote

Lecter wrote

Linear wrote

Sanyo wrote

FKX wrote i was reading about this last night, only down side is they dont know if the cells are weak due to old age or strong due to being revived.

mice are helping us become immortal

But at what cost? they are killing all these mice.

Yes, and what exactly is your point...?

His point is what gives us the right to kill these mice as if our lives are more important than theirs.

Because we are greater than them...

Says who? Us?
That makes sense.

I don't think humans are worth more than any other animal, you and Linear obviously do.
This is one of those topics where debating it really doesn't change anyone's viewpoint so there's not much point.

The Lion eats the Gazelle because it's weaker than him. Is he sitting there questioning his morals? No, he's surviving, adapting and making things better for himself.

Do we get annoyed at the shark because he eats fish? No.

What is the difference between eating the animal or using it to our advantage. It's the same thing.

You're putting a low mark on our opinions, and write yours as if it is the correct one - it isn't, there is no correct opinion; it is purely that.

Everyone states their opinion as if it's the correct one, you're doing it as well, and I already said that this was all opinion at the start...

I get annoyed at animals being used to test things that we don't need.
We do not need to find a way to make our lives longer, we don't need makeup and cosmetics yet they are tested on animals all of the time.
We're the only species which kills because we can, not because we have to.

That's why I don't see how you can compare us to a lion, or a shark.

You're reading it how you want it to be. He hasn't said anything to do with your comment...

No, he said humans are better because we build civilizations and do more than just hunt to survive.
Ants build civilizations too, and there are some humans who can't do anything more than just survive.
If we can kill animals because they can't do anything more than that, why can't we do it to humans as well?

I just don't understand how people can accept the food chain then complain about animal testing.

I accept the food chain, but how does that correlate with our need to test cosmetics on rabbits?
If we were eating the rabbits it would make sense, but we're not.
We're using them to make ourselves prettier, that's not key to our survival.

I heard about something like a few years ago, where these certain jellyfish (medusozoa) can re-produce every cell in their body, I believe it take a few weeks.

Lecter wrote

I just don't understand how people can accept the food chain then complain about animal testing.

I accept the food chain, but how does that correlate with our need to test cosmetics on rabbits?
If we were eating the rabbits it would make sense, but we're not.
We're using them to make ourselves prettier, that's not key to our survival.

Welcome to the 21st century.

Nab wrote

Lecter wrote

I just don't understand how people can accept the food chain then complain about animal testing.

I accept the food chain, but how does that correlate with our need to test cosmetics on rabbits?
If we were eating the rabbits it would make sense, but we're not.
We're using them to make ourselves prettier, that's not key to our survival.

Welcome to the 21st century.

Is there a point in there?
Or are you subtly saying that the only reason humans are better than animals is because we say so?

Lecter wrote

Nab wrote

Lecter wrote

I just don't understand how people can accept the food chain then complain about animal testing.

I accept the food chain, but how does that correlate with our need to test cosmetics on rabbits?
If we were eating the rabbits it would make sense, but we're not.
We're using them to make ourselves prettier, that's not key to our survival.

Welcome to the 21st century.

Is there a point in there?
Or are you subtly saying that the only reason humans are better than animals is because we say so?

What is your definition of better? And if no one else is going to say we're not better than them - you must assume we are better.

In 'their' terms, the 'best' is the dominant male with the best mating call (etc). We are stronger and smarter than them in almost any way.

We are trying to understand the world around us, sure there is animal testing for greed but more than not, it's done to protect and better ourselves in useful ways.


What is different from eating the animal to survive, or using the animal to increase understanding.