Thundergod Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 http://www.undeadreport.com/2007/11/us-scientists-continue-commie-reanimation-research/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilliangirl Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 That's revolting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jantha Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 That is... Creepy, twisted, disturbing and wrong... and also probably the COOLEST thing I've ever seen! I'm not sure if it's real or not. The full video is pretty interesting. Do zombie dogs prefer Kibbles 'n Brains? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrosurfer1959 Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 Not much value in reanimating a dogs head - it couldn't even fetch the paper! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveinspain Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 That's sick.... I wouldn't want anyone to reanimate my head.... Well maybe if they could stick it on a younger body... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZenKen Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 Revolting? Sick? What if this research leads to the development of technologies that save human life in the future? What if the human life saved is your child's or grandchild's? Is it still revolting? Many technologies that save and enhance human life (and your pet dog's) today are the result of animal experimentation. I would suggest that injecting hair dye into the eyes of rabbits is revolting but experiments aimed at the development of life saving treatments for both humans and other animals is acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted April 17, 2010 Author Share Posted April 17, 2010 What if that tech leads to zombie holocaust? Or worst, Futurama style stupidity, where all famous people get their heads presserved for "our pleasure and enjoyment", you know, there's an episode where Nixon's head dons a robot body and takes over the world Anyway, not only do I find it disturbing, I find it a complete disrespect for nature and living beings. I never understood why such people don't do those experiments to their family and loved ones. I also think people shouldn't live forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZenKen Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 I also think people shouldn't live forever. Well I don't think we're looking at technology that will lead to immortality (you'll need a #1 hit for that). I'm suggesting that common technologies like organ transplants that save the lives of infants born with malformations or dialysis that improves and extends the lives of those waiting for transplantation would not be available to us absent this type of testing. Yes, what was posted here is extreme (and note that the film and pictures are decades old so I am not convinced that this type of research is actually ongoing) but the reality is that the technologies and drugs that make our lives and the lives of other animals better, are the direct result of animal testing, the only currently available developmental method we have. You may be comforted in the knowledge that very smart people are working on enhanced computer models that will reduce (never eliminate) the need for this type of testing. These tools are in use today but cannot, to date, replace the need for human analog testing. Perhaps someday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jantha Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 Agreed, ZenKen. As a disclaimer, I LOVE dogs, and animals. I don't condone animal cruelty. All joking aside, I don't feel that the purpose of these experiments were to create a breed of zombie dogs or hellhounds. I would imagine dogs were chosen because of their bond with humans and their expressiveness. It would be easy to tell if a dog "came back" to life in an altered state, such as they did in Pet Cemetary. On the surface it seems cruel, but I would imagine these scientists gained valuable insight on how long a brain can survive without oxygen and well as how to preserve organs for transplants. These are useful things to know when trying to preserve a life that would otherwise be cut short, or save a life of a loved one. I would imagine some of these techniques that were learned here are used in procedures that are considered common today, such as open heart surgery. I don't think these things were known in the 1940's. So creepy, disturbing and revolting? It depends. If the goal is to produce Frankenmutts to do our bidding, then yes, it is morally wrong... and kinda stupid because dogs are already willing and happy to do our bidding. However, if the goal is to learn and develop medical techniques that can save lives, then in my opinion it's a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted April 17, 2010 Author Share Posted April 17, 2010 Are you a man of faith ZenKen? We shouldn't play God is all I'm sayin' (and no, actually I'm not a man of faith) I got word there's experiments just like that going on in the states right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted April 17, 2010 Author Share Posted April 17, 2010 I would imagine dogs were chosen because of their bond with humans and their expressiveness. It would be easy to tell if a dog "came back" to life in an altered state' date=' such as they did in Pet Cemetary.[/quote'] Not really, dogs were cheap in russia at the time, they were stray dogs in every street and people were almost sick of it, that's why they used them instead of chimps for their spacial program too, you would just go to the street and get stray dogs and experiment on them. From what I've gathered, it seems the same guy that performed the dog head experiment is the guy that years later did the first heart surgery and also replaced human organs. So yes, you guys have a point and a valid one, without this kind of thing humans would suffer. My point is, maybe God intended us to suffer and we are tryin' to cheat out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZenKen Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 Are you a man of faith ZenKen? We shouldn't play God i Did God endow man with the intelligence to use what is available to us for good? Some say yes. I have no idea. But let's change the focus here for a moment. Are you vegan TG? If not you use animals to enhance your life every day. Do you like leather? If so you exploit animals for their very skin. Every day we use animal products and I dare say without their permission. I love animals, I respect them, but I love my children more, much more. My wife takes life improving drugs every day, all of which we surely tested on animals before being made available for humans. I thank whatever God there may be that these things are possible even if it means through animal testing. Peace brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem00n Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 Cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted April 17, 2010 Author Share Posted April 17, 2010 Did God endow man with the intelligence to use what is available to us for good? Some say yes. I have no idea. But let's change the focus here for a moment. Are you vegan TG? If not you use animals to enhance your life every day. Do you like leather? If so you exploit animals for their very skin. Every day we use animal products and I dare say without their permission. I love animals' date=' I respect them, but I love my children more, much more. My wife takes life improving drugs every day, all of which we surely tested on animals before being made available for humans. I thank whatever God there may be that these things are possible even if it means through animal testing. Peace brother.[/quote'] Again you make a valid point, and I have to agree. I'll say this tho, it's natural to eat animals (in nature, animals are eaten by other animals, it serves a purpose), it's not natural to experiment on them. Let me put it this way... If lions didn't eat other animals they'd cease to exist. If humans didn't experiment on them they wouldn't cease to exist. Now what's more important to the world, lions or humans? (I know I'll get flamed for that one, I just know it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jantha Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 My point is' date=' maybe God intended us to suffer and we are tryin' to cheat out of it.[confused'] Yea, I know exactly what you mean. I struggle with that too. Organ transplants and such don't bother me. I guess I'd *like* to believe that God has granted us certain knowledge for our own good. However, we need to be respectful and responsible... and that's where I worry. Freezing someone and reviving them years later to cure their disease is way over the line and creepy to me. I think there's a lot about life, death and spirituality that we don't understand, and just cause we *can*, doesn't mean we *should*. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZenKen Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 and just cause we *can*' date=' doesn't mean we *should*.[/quote'] What if it saves your child? What if it saves an infant who saves the world as an adult? Big questions. I say the child is more important than the lion, or the dog or the monkey. The child may save all the animals in the future, including us. The lion will never have the ability to convince the world to eschew nuclear weapons and war. The child just might. In fact the child might develop ways to bring new medical technologies to the world without animal testing. How cool would that be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jantha Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 What if it saves your child? If an organ transplant can save my child, then I'm all for it. If my child is pulled out of an icy lake and has been "dead" for a few minutes and they want to resuscitate, then I'm all for it. If a doctor says "Well, we can freeze your kid, and *maybe* bring them back to life in 30 years to cure their disease", then I would have to tell him to stick it. I'm just saying that there are some boundaries that shouldn't be crossed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted April 17, 2010 Author Share Posted April 17, 2010 What if it saves an infant who saves the world as an adult? Define "save the world"... and from what' date=' from humans and/or human related/caused stuff? Makes you think eh? The child may save all the animals in the future' date=' including us.[/quote'] Not likely, humans don't save anything, humans have this stupid sense of self importance in the grand scheme of things, they think they are all there is to the world and the universe. Humans think they are needed in this world and in existence, I tell you what, in order of importance we don't make it to the first 3'000.000 The lion will never have the ability to convince the world to eschew nuclear weapons and war. Nor will he have the ability to create them in the first place. The child just might. And he might invent something worst than nuclear weapons. How about the grey end? (or whatever they call that apocalyptic nanobot invasion thing over there). In fact the child might develop ways to bring new medical technologies to the world without animal testing. How cool would that be? That would be cool. It would be cool if tests were made to humans, there are lots of humans not useful to society (and I'm talking as if I was one of the testers not the testees as for testers and those who are "blessed" by the results the ends seems to justify any means) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZenKen Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 It would be cool if tests were made to humans' date=' there are lots of humans not useful to society (and I'm talking as if I was one of the testers not the testees as for testers and those who are "blessed" by the results the ends seems to justify any means)[/quote'] Wow TG. Now you sound like a guy who a large group of humans saved the world from a generation ago. My father and uncle were among those humans who made great sacrifices to save something....the world you and I enjoy today. I think you may need to study history a bit and learn what humans have done to benefit the earth. We do not only destroy, we create, wonderful things. And have some faith in the future brother. The youth of today, although much maligned (and not unlike my generation), will do great things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrosurfer1959 Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Most theologists state that death occurs and the part of the body that carries divine life the soul leave that body. SO that person and their soul are separated at death and the soul is then allowed to do soul stuff, like become a angel or whatever a all bright and shiny new free agent soul does. well years pass and the hell happens the scientist come up with the caner for whatever kill the body and after a few revolution in the body-sickle microwave and a pair of jumper cable and zap the body is reanimated right. Well without it's soul what is it a new body with the same legal standing as the body donor or a hellish nightmare of a soulless zombie or without what ever the spark is to get get a veg that just sits around drooling down his/her front. either way doesn't sound like a real pretty picture but it would make space travel achievable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverside Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Organ reanimation? I just got through resurrecting an M3 that sat outside for 10 years. A little oil, a little patience, and I'll be darned. It sounds pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepblue Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 They actually filmed Timothy Leary getting his head removed...I saw the movie. Fascinating, but sickening at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyK Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 Medical slight of hand. The 'severed' head recoiled / moved at the hammer being pounded near its nose. In order to for the head to be moved the muscles below the jaw, on he head would have to be attached to the body in order for them to be able to move the head. Since the head has been 'removed' from the body, the muscles have no anchorage to pull against, therefore it would be impossible for the head to move itself. There was a lot of this propoganda type stuff going on in Russia at the time. I don't believe the rest of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilliangirl Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 What if it saves your child? What if it saves an infant who saves the world as an adult? Big questions. I say the child is more important than the lion' date=' or the dog or the monkey. The child may save all the animals in the future, including us. The lion will never have the ability to convince the world to eschew nuclear weapons and war. The child just might. In fact the child might develop ways to bring new medical technologies to the world without animal testing. How cool would that be?[/quote']Do ethics factor into this at all for you? Is everything okay with you if it means advancement for humans? I work in long term care and I have seen some of the people the medical establishment has *saved*. Trust me, not all medical advancements to save lives is a good thing. And for me, no medical advancement/technology is worth cruelty to another species. Sometimes the end does NOT justify the means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted April 21, 2010 Author Share Posted April 21, 2010 Do ethics factor into this at all for you? Is everything okay with you if it means advancement for humans? I work in long term care and I have seen some of the people the medical establishment has *saved*. Trust me' date=' not all medical advancements to save lives is a good thing. And for me, no medical advancement/technology is worth cruelty to another species. Sometimes the end does NOT justify the means.[/quote'] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.