pantheory

Yeah, some Christians are like that but many Christians, and religious people in general from my experience, are often gentle folk that would like to convert someone passively to their faith, but only for that person's own good in their opinion. I go to church once in a while, and like to sing the songs and mix with religious folk, but when I do it's usually a women in a small group that occasionally asks me, with a little aggression, Forrest (my first name), what do you believe? And of course I'm a pure atheist but have no ax to grind concerning religions in general because my parents and Christian life was gentle and not demanding. So when asked this question I say that I do not like to discuss my beliefs in public, but say that I will be glad to tell them in a private conversation concerning my beliefs. Such a private conversation with a married woman separate from her husband would be considered inappropriate by them, so they say "no thank you" and the word gets around. Nobody asks me any more as to what I believe in this group. To me that approach and its results are hilarious.

Yes, I'm for it also. The main purpose for genetic engineering in today's world is to treat or cure genetic diseases, and secondly to add desirable genetic traits to both plants and animals. This can be done be genetic transplants, the most well-known process of which is called Crispr gene transplants, as gene therapy and gene editing. It's a kind of cut and paste process. Cut out an unwanted gene and paste in a new one that performs the desired task. The process is accomplished by bacteria and viruses designed for the task. A gene is a. region of DNA that encodes function in a plant or animal. Chromosomes are made up of long strands of DNA consisting of many genes. The human chromosome, for instance, has about 500 million base pairs of DNA consisting of thousands of genes. Crispr technology enables editing the DNA of both plants and animals (including humans) to bring about desired changes. Crispr is the primary genetic engineering tool of the day, less than a decade old in its present form. It's potential seems endless and boundless to serve and help humanity, but it can do undesirable things also if in the wrong hands, or by mistake. The link below was written to help students learn the basics of Crispr technology. https://www.sciencenewsforstudents.org/article/explainer-how-crispr-works

So far the only antibodies used against Covid 19 are human antibodies extracted from the blood serum of people who have already recovered from the disease. But they are working on using animal antibodies also. For Covid 19, promising animal antibodies tested have been from llamas. Llamas are injected with a protein from Covid 19, called a spike protein. In time the Llama builds up antibodies against the virus that can be extracted from their blood serum, and which test as being very promising in fighting the virus in a petry dish. Such a process in time could be used as a possible vaccine in humans, but for now animals might provide a good source for antibodies to treat people already infected. Most flu shots are developed from Chicken embryos, where the virus is grown. then extracted and treated (subdivided or killed) so that it cannot multiply. The vaccinated person then builds their own antibodies against the flu virus. Methods using recombinant DNA/ RNA to develop artificial flu virus parts that cannot infect are used for vaccinations. It is a good and efficient process and method that is expected to become the standard for flu vaccine production, but as for now it's relatively expensive and they don't presently have the capacity needed for large scale world-wide production by this method. As for Covid 19, they will also be working on the recombinant RNA process to develop one of the many vaccines being considered around the world to fight this infection. In time one vaccine will be tested against another to find the best, but for now antibodies from human blood serum extractions are the only antibodies approved for treating already infected people. But they have researched and tested animal antibodies also, and will be testing many more concerning the Covid 19 virus. For now llama antibodies seem to be promising. https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-04/uota-afl042920.php

Hi Georgia. That's my sister's name. I am a total atheist and would bet my immortal soul against a six pack of beer since I would have nothing to lose. I have had nothing but good experiences with the church but I lost my belief right before I went to college because I studied a number of Christian religions, and for interest sake went to Jewish, Buddhist and Hindu Temples. All of it was very cool. I generally had nothing but good experiences with religion and the religious people that I knew and met. Upon turning to adulthood I realized that all religion was pure and simple BS. But that didn't stop me from going to Church sometimes since I liked the people and liked to sing. My family are all Christians and I still go to Church once in a while since I still like to sing and mingle with religious folk. It's not any religion in particular that I think is worthless, it's the teachings of all religions which sound to me like Greek mythology; every single religion and belief in a god of some kind to me is like believing in Zeus. So for me God with or without religion is just a pretty fantasy. I call my sister Georgie affectionately,. btw I have been a scientist for many decades but believe science theory is not always right either. Everybody should believe only what makes sense to them, not just what you have been taught or what people you trust or respect believe.

As has already been explained, one must normally take apart a viable embryo to get embryonic stem cells which are pluropotent, meaning they can become any type of cell in the body. There are other types of stem cells used in treatments such as autologous, and fetal, etc.. Autologous are your own stem cells, usually taken from your fat. When taken from someone else’s fat they are called fat stem cells. These have the potential to become some other types of body cells other than fat (but not all types). Fetal stem cells come from umbilical cord blood, placental blood, and from still born, premature births, early death, aborted, etc. These stem cells can produce a number of different cells but must be pre-selected from organs to find particular types of cells. After 3-4 months in the womb the baby's separate immune system is developing so that after this fetal age cells can be rejected by implantation. Only embryonic stem cells are not rejected in general if blood types are the same. Yes, most embryonic stem cells are derived from the invitro-fertilization processes where extra fertilized eggs are left over after a baby or two are born. The parents often will donate the left-over eggs if requested to do so. Sometimes doctors can offer a much lower cost for invitro-fertilization if he/she can sell the excess fertilized eggs for stem cell research or treatments with permissions given beforehand. Many people in general do not have a moral problem with stem cell research and treatments if the embryo only has a few hundred cells before organs start to develop. But many religions believe that all human life, even embryonic stem-cell life only a few days old is precious since if implanted it might become a baby, and by dismantling these early cells (zygote) one would be killing a baby in their eyes. I have problems with the present limiting laws of stem-cell research but understand religious objections. The primary problem with the laws these people promote which inhibit stem cell research and treatments in the US are based upon such religious beliefs. In my own non-profit research organization I study and do stem cell research to the extent where I study what others have discovered and apply to treatments. For non-medical research I have had others work with me in scientific research and application. For stem cell research I have only working on this myself and have developed a theoretical process to get past the basic religious objections, even though these objections are not important to me personally, but this research might get laws changed. The theoretical process starts in a similar way as the traditional stem cell retrieval system with the invitro-fertiliztion process. But instead of the eggs being fertilized to start with, only unfertilized eggs would be stored. Like fertilized eggs, unfertilized eggs can be frozen in the same manner as fertilized eggs then unthawed and fertilized before implantation. After the desired amount of babies are born the eggs left over remain frozen and unfertilized, and by permission beforehand would be the property of the lab that helped finance the invitro-process. In such a process desired females could be chosen to start with, as well as fertilization can be done by chosen males, both based upon their genetic history. Before fertilization, a tiny spot on the outside of the egg can be marked for observation under a microscope. Along with this marking a growth inhibitor is added to the marking fluid. Upon fertilization of the egg when in a food sustaining solution, it starts to grow and divide quickly. The outside of the egg would normally form into the placenta of the fetus. But because of the growth inhibitor in the marking the placenta would not properly form or develop to support a baby. When taking apart such a embryo one avoids the marked tissue, and the whole of it could never develop into a implantable fetus. Thus it would eliminate the objection that one is killing a baby. Of course it is not a natural process so there will always be religious objections of some kind. But this process could lead to more favorable laws for stem cell research and treatments in the US and other countries having moral objections to present practices. Even the research on this process could more rapidly proceed outside the US because of present limiting laws.

Yes, post-materialist science already exists in the humanities such as psychology and sociology. Yes, some physical science interpretations have involved post-materialism approaches but material science does not mix well with post-materialism in that the scientific method can be altered, then the question becomes is this really science? The strange interpretations of quantum theory come to mind, a number of which are misinterpretations of reality in my opinion. This does not mean that looking outside the box using post-materialism should never be considered, but I think this approach is limited concerning what new insights might come about by its use.

Thinking is great. Nothing can be accomplished without it. But in Psychology overthinking can cause strife, such a worrying too much for instance. I expect that intrusive thoughts might be another example that might take practice to control. Bizarre intrusive thoughts are quite common. The deal is that intrusive thoughts come and go but if weird or valueless don't dwell on them. In psychology "Intrusive thoughts are thoughts that enter your consciousness, often without warning or prompting, with content that is alarming, disturbing, or just flat-out weird. They're thoughts we all have at some point, but for some people, these thoughts get “stuck” and cause great distress (Seif & Winston, 2018)." https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk03qGnINGjnqBhDpLLvB5OwEoorxnw%3A1587312448761&source=hp&ei=QHecXqGMLNbb-wSBk6vgCQ&q=psychology+intrusive+thoughts&oq=psychology+intrusi&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQARgAMgIIADIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBQgAEM0COgUIABCDAToFCAAQkQJQ2wxY_UJg51xoAXAAeACAAagBiAHWC5IBBDE3LjGYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6&sclient=psy-ab

We are looking at a great number of ways that the Covid 19 data could be wrong, misleading, and/ or misconstrued. In the US very few people can get tested for Covid 19 unless that person has strong symptoms of the disease and a doctor has recommended the test. Even then priority goes to the elderly and those with underlying health conditions. There is not enough data in the US to tell what percentage of people have false positive or false negative results from these tests. For this we could look to worldwide data whereby it can be estimated that roughly 20% of testing will yield false positives, and roughly 12 percent will yield false negatives. The false negatives can be attributed to specimen collection methods and problems inherent in the testing itself. But there is no agreement as to the reasons for false positives. There also could be 10 times the number of people who have contacted the disease and are producing antibodies against it who won't be tested, and if tested would likely not test positive. Only an antibody test could find these people, but presently there is no such approved antibody test in the US, even though there are foreign antibody tests available being used in the US. Those people that do not have symptoms of the disease might not be very likely to spread the disease if they are not sneezing, coughing, and there is little or no viral containing aerosol in their breath. What percentages of the people who have been tested have Covid 19? In the US the percentage rate is about 20%. This is one of the highest in the world, but other countries that have had higher per capita testing, have a lower percentage of positive results. What percentage of people that have had Covid 19 are being tested? This is the key to how serious the disease is for people who are under 65, do not smoke or vape, and do not have underlying health conditions. Since Covid 19 has not been around that long these is a very big difference of opinion concerning this figure. The most conservative projection is that at least 1 in 10 people who have had the disease get tested. The most optimistic view is that for every person that gets tested there are 200 more people who have not been tested because most did not think they had the disease, and some had no symptoms. The ultimate question then becomes, what percentage of the people who get Covid 19 die from it. We know that 3.4% of the people in the US who have tested positive, have died from the disease. In the world the death rate stands at roughly 2%. In the US Roughly only 10% of those tested have the disease. “When undetected infections weren't taken into account, the Lancet study found that the coronavirus death rate was 1.38%, which is more consistent with earlier reports." But many experts think this figure is too high. Using the most conservative numbers this calculates to be .66% percent of those infected in US will die from the disease. Using the most positive numbers, only 1 in 200 people who have been exposed to the disease and would test positive, ever get sick enough to get tested. This would be a death rate of only .069%, or about 2-3 people per thousand who contract the disease enough to get sick, will die from it. By comparison Influenza types A and B together (the flu), about 1 person per thousand dies from the flu per year. Roughly half of those people had flu shots that same year. For those that did not have a flu shot that season the death rate was about 2 people per thousand, twice as many, not much different from the Covid 19 best-projection death rate. Trying to put this into perspective, for people under 65 with no known underlying health conditions, their chances of dying from an auto accident or other preventable injuries including suicide, are probably greater than them dying from Covid 19. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/04/15/834497497/antibody-tests-for-coronavirus-can-miss-the-mark https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/04/cdc-launches-studies-to-get-more-precise-count-of-undetected-covid-19-cases/ https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30/health/coronavirus-lower-death-rate/index.html https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/deaths-by-demographics/all-leading-causes-of-death/?utm_campaign=Injury+Facts&utm_source=adwords&utm_term=leading cause of death in us&utm_medium=ppc&hsa_cam=244859199&hsa_ad=294883670143&hsa_net=adwords&hsa_acc=3965156914&hsa_grp=55630082869&hsa_tgt=kwd-298697443163&hsa_ver=3&hsa_src=g&hsa_kw=leading cause of death in us&hsa_mt=b&gclid=CjwKCAjw7e_0BRB7EiwAlH-goBhfMxIPiQ0SVBWYc9RnQTAacuTGathwP1Rhv7h2-ux2QXdeg7nnIBoC2oYQAvD_BwE

Do creationists believe in the validity of "Known geologic processes" at all? Most creationists believe that dinosaurs and humans were created at the same time, right? That doesn't fit at all with known geologic processes. It's exactly the opposite of known historical geology since I took that course in college. Yes, Christians would have to get very creative to explain these footprints on the ceiling of a cave for those who believe in the stories of the old testament.

Walter, Quotes from links below: "Venus presents a thin crescent in telescopic views as it comes around to the near side between the Earth and the Sun and presents its new phase when it is between the Earth and the Sun. The full cycle from new to full to new again takes 584 days (the time it takes Venus to overtake the Earth in its orbit)." Every 584 days Venus disappears from the naked eye at night in the cities. Like a new moon this is the phase when Venus is between the Earth and the sun so we can only see a faint ring of uniform light around Venus, observable with only a relatively small magnification such as binoculars on a clear night. This phase lasts 4-5 nights. Away from city lights maybe you can see this phase if one has good vision and knows where to look depending on your latitude. During this "new Venus" phase, Venus can pass in front of the sun from our perspective, very slightly diminishing the sun's light and heat. This doesn't happen very often, only about once every 75 times that Venus passes Earth on its inner obit. Transit events happen only twice every 121.5 years, 8 years apart. "The last transit of Venus was on the 5th and 6th of June 2012, and was the last Venus transit of the 21st century; the prior transit took place on the 8th of June 2004. The previous pair of transits were in December 1874 and December 1882. The next transits of Venus will take place on the 10th & 11th of December 2117 and the 8th of December 2125." https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk02C-tdiNpVTJHrhmRJfpUzrwzorog%3A1585190271183&ei=fxV8XuXSCuyy0PEP4pyAgAo&q=total+phases+of+venus&oq=total+phases+of+venus&gs_l=psy-ab.12..33i299l3.37612.46334..49440...1.2..0.213.2206.12j8j1......0....1..gws-wiz.....10..0i71j35i362i39j35i39j0i273j0i131j0i67j0j0i22i30j33i22i29i30.0irpHg-Fq9I&ved=0ahUKEwiljo_4jbfoAhVsGTQIHWIOAKAQ4dUDCAo https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk03pporoAyzpa7vJERqMwwQOJwbjqA%3A1585283151800&source=hp&ei=T4B9Xt-kLpiw0PEPsPmX-Ao&q=when+did+venus+last+transit+the+sun&oq=when+did+venus+last+transit+the+sun&gs_l=psy-ab.12..33i299.1804.17695..21675...1.0..1.375.4368.13j18j3j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......35i39j0i273j0i67j0j0i131j0i20i263j0i22i30j0i333j33i22i29i30j33i160.zWEe-7IPWMA&ved=0ahUKEwifiIT557noAhUYGDQIHbD8Ba8Q4dUDCAs

As of March 20th there were unbelievably 86 clinical trials of COVID-19 treatments or vaccines proposed or ongoing in the U.S. alone, with new drugs being proposed almost daily. Both types of drugs are either ongoing or recruiting participants or patients. Imagine how many other treatment drugs and vaccines are being considered and tested around the world. The drugs being tested range from flu treatment drugs developed for Ebola, SARS, MERS treatment drugs, newly developed and proposed drugs, etc., including malaria treatment drugs that were first developed decades ago. To be approved for this testing one has to present evidence concerning the efficacy of the drug concerning Covid 19. It’s no joke that in the U.S. they will have a hard time finding the people to test these treatment drugs. The reason is that many of these drugs require patients, after testing positive for Covid 19, that are very ill and have particular symptoms or medical history needed to test that particular drug. Even for testing vaccines, most people do not want to be a Ginny pig even though they will be paid to be in these trials. Take a look at the link below to see a list of these 86 presently proposed treatment drugs and vaccines for Covid 19. https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-covid-19-treatments.html?utm_source=Selligent&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=15631&utm_content=20200323_Coronavirus_Infographic+&utm_term=2875217&m_i=xugCBo%2Bir1F0ZuGuBrB%2BFsC0%2BpCOUHvB9DJGyic7shdAZeMk79Rse%2BZWgFDYcUb6O9wugUiH70Mi4%2Burr32yIL6ZBP3T_p From Penicillin in the 1940's starting the anti-bacterial plethora of drugs now available, this seems to be the beginning of a slew of anti-viral drugs that will be available in the next few and continuing years for particular viral infections all over the world. On the horizon is the universal flu vaccine, and I'm expecting to see news in the coming year or so for a combat treatment drug or vaccine against viral pneumonia, a very big killer around the world; a vaccine or better treatment drugs are also in the works. All this money being thrown at Covid 19 will help set a precedent; money spent on drug research and development yields results. And what about the common cold? The giant on-line retailer Amazon is working on such a common-cold vaccine. https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/amazon-developing-a-vaccine-against-common-cold-report

Cool test question Walter. I won't spoil the test for others but will give a clue to those people answering, by asking a clue question. When is the moon at its brightest? Sorry; I thought I was the first poster, but I'm not even the second or third to answer. Others have answered the question correctly already. Oh well!

Here's another one. I expect this to be on-going news for awhile. A Japanese antiviral flu drug called Favipiravir or Avigan, has shown promise in relieving symptoms of the COVID 19 coronavirus. Upon a larger scale study with a control (this drug compared with another, or an untreated group), they may be able to statistically determine if this drug is truly effective in relieving the symptoms of the disease, and/ or whether the severity of the disease itself can be mitigated by this drug. In the meantime, according to related sources, treatments in China and elsewhere using this drug, as of mid-March, seem to be going well based upon several hundred test cases. For those patients having a more severe case of the disease, it has been difficult to judge the drugs efficacy or the extent that it possibly could help once a patient is seriously ill. https://www.livescience.com/flu-drug-could-treat-coronavirus.html?utm_source=Selligent&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=15423&utm_content=20200318_Coronavirus_Infographic+&utm_term=2875217&m_i=XWcXoB9HCmXzPJmWpVJ74xYOD6Zte6LzBnCO92slFDRcrVR3hViIoTA2gm9OInGDykZ0y7dbdduFl8cprQcyAK85I_HdrD

Progress on a corona virus vaccine: The beginning of vaccine testing for the COVID 19 coronavirus began yesterday March 16, 2020. This beginning test is a safety test. They are vaccinating healthy volunteers to see if the vaccine has any undesirable side effects. Once it passes this test they will solicit healthy volunteers who continuously have exposure to the disease such as doctors, nurses, health care workers, researchers, etc., to see if the drug is effective in preventing infection. This new vaccine is unusual in that no live or weakened viruses, virus parts or related proteins are used to promote an immune system response. Instead they use a different type of protein that hopefully will block an infection based upon stopping the replication process of the virus. The fastest this new vaccine could become available for the general population would be at least one year from now if all goes well in testing between now and then. Within the coming year to 18 months there will expectedly be other COVID 19 vaccines ready for testing. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/16/health/coronavirus-vaccine.html For treatment of those that are already infected there are a number of already approved drugs for other purposes that are in testing for their effectiveness against the coronavirus, which can be used on corona virus patients if recommended by a doctor. Several of these drugs are AIDS related viral drugs and others have been used against SARS, EBOLA, Malaria and other related viral infections. Some may relieve symptoms for some patients and others will hopefully have the ability to reduce the extent of the infection. Testing has already begun on these drugs also. https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/16/remdesivir-surges-ahead-against-coronavirus/ https://www.asm.org/Podcasts/MTM/Episodes/Coronavirus-Antiviral-Drug-Discovery-with-Timothy https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/here-are-some-existing-drugs-may-be-repurposed-treat-coronavirus-n1162021 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/science/coronavirus-treatment.html We also may be only a couple of years away from the testing of a universal flu vaccine. This vaccine will be much more effective and usable worldwide against influenza types A and B since a selection of stains will not have to be developed every year. To start with it is expected to be 75% effective each season, an improvement of 15-20%, and also is expected to be improved upon as time passes. This will likely save more lives in every country than will a COViD 19 coronavirus vaccine alone. The new funds approved for the coronavirus will also help in the development of such a universal flu vaccine since the coronavirus is also a type of flu. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/progress-universal-flu-vaccine

The ideas of some people? Hilarious!