How prepared are you for the next pandemic?

[Lejuan]

to me just someone/something that has knowledge and powers beyond human abilities and can control almost anything.

you can call someone like omniman god, you can call someone like Son Goku god among gods, you can call some alien with super advance tech god, if they were real. To me God can be relative. Of course the most powerful one will be THE GOD.

fun facts. in india it is common that anyone has the freedom to choose their own god, can be literally anything, from a famous celebrity, to your local leader, to even animals, and worship them as god.

this is why theres so many holyman with big followers.

What you're describing is a god with agency. I base my assessment of the universe and existence on scientific evidence, so an interventionist god isn't something I subscribe to.

 

[potato]

What you're describing is a god with agency. I base my assessment of the universe and existence on scientific evidence, so an interventionist god isn't something I subscribe to.

to me they are considered god. doesnt mean i have to worship them and treat them as god.

 

[jaztermareal]

If we are gonna talk about god(s) and beliefs perhaps I should lay out my oversimplified understanding of the various states of belief, knowledge and religiosity so we do not misunderstand each other.

Belief in a non interventionist god is Deism. Such a belief in practical terms is not much different than the belief that there is no god in that it is up to us to fix our own problems though it posits a prime mover who created life/humanity/the universe.

Belief in a singular interventionist god is obviously Theism, which often results in a "God won't let that happen" mentality which while comforting can result in inaction. Meanwhile, believing in multiple gods is Polytheism (obviously).

Atheism is the lack of belief in a god or gods. It is basically the default position before you are taught to believe in a god. It does not claim to have all the answers but at the same time does not fill the gaps in knowledge with god.

All the above deal with state of belief.

Gnosticism and Agnosticism refer to a state of knowledge of gods existence or whether one believes it is possible to know. In practice we are all agnostic in the sense we do not know that a god(s) exists though it can be argued that some are gnostic in that they believe knowledge of gods nature is possible.


Religious, non religious and anti religious obviously refer to your state of religiosity. You can believe in a god yet have no religion or you can lack a belief in god but be part of a religion.


So, someone like myself would be a non religious, agnostic atheist. The average woke university student is more along the lines of a religious agnostic atheist while the average Christian is a religious agnostic theist.

How would you classify yourself Potato?

 

[devilof76]

Before you ask yourself "is god real", ask yourself, "what do I mean by god"?

Best I can tell, all of the ‘gods’ are a supreme, disembodied consciousness, uniquely capable of genuine knowledge due to being unencumbered by a material form, to whom obedience will affect the best possible outcome for hide-bound mortals, who cannot ever truly know for themselves, until their consciousness separates from their body at the moment of death and they transcend to the same state of being as their master.

 

[devilof76]

How would you classify yourself Potato?

Gnostic atheist here. I’d say non-religious but I think Olympian Greek is too excellent to not play along.

 

[jaztermareal]

It seems Chinese researchers recently published their work involving another coronavirus. They took a Pangolin coronavirus (I forget the virus name) and passaged it through cultured cells then took the resulting artificially evolved virus and infected mice. All the mice died from brain damage and the virus was found in areas such as the lungs suggesting it would transmit via droplets (much like other coronaviruses). This gain of function research was probably done at BSL-2 facilities (where China does a lot us such coronavirus research) though I have not yet checked to see if that is the case. But even assuming it was done at BSL-4 does anyone trust that it (or any one of the other viruses they are doing GOF work on) won't at some point leak?

 

[Dave_W]

Double edged sword. Create a 'controlled' virus in order to better understand the pathology and develop more effective medicines in the future in case similar viruses develop vs accidentally leak said virus and do natures job a lot earlier.

 

[jaztermareal]

Double edged sword. Create a 'controlled' virus in order to better understand the pathology and develop more effective medicines in the future in case similar viruses develop vs accidentally leak said virus and do natures job a lot earlier.

It is questionable that such viruses would ever even evolve naturally anyway, so to develop dangerous viruses with pandemic potential that have a chance of leaking is far far more likely to trigger a pandemic than a rare natural spillover event.

Given that those who develop such viruses can then develop vaccines or inoculations for those viruses that others won't have or even know they should develop GOF has huge bioweapons potential which might be why govs seem so keen to do it.

 

[Dave_W]

It is questionable that such viruses would ever even evolve naturally anyway, so to develop dangerous viruses with pandemic potential that have a chance of leaking is far far more likely to trigger a pandemic than a rare natural spillover event.

Given that those who develop such viruses can then develop vaccines or inoculations for those viruses that others won't have or even know they should develop GOF has huge bioweapons potential which might be why govs seem so keen to do it.

Yeah it's ironic that in trying to make people safe in the future, they are being potentially put at risk. Then there are the nefarious reasons to do it as you say. I'm sure both instances are happening. They could also be developing them and their vaccines as a form of defense in case other countries develop similar related viruses.

Humans aren't responsible enough to handle this kind of knowledge, same with nuclear weapons. We're far too naive, selfish and greedy.

 

[potato]

It seems Chinese researchers recently published their work involving another coronavirus. They took a Pangolin coronavirus (I forget the virus name) and passaged it through cultured cells then took the resulting artificially evolved virus and infected mice. All the mice died from brain damage and the virus was found in areas such as the lungs suggesting it would transmit via droplets (much like other coronaviruses). This gain of function research was probably done at BSL-2 facilities (where China does a lot us such coronavirus research) though I have not yet checked to see if that is the case. But even assuming it was done at BSL-4 does anyone trust that it (or any one of the other viruses they are doing GOF work on) won't at some point leak?

it will leak when they decided to leak them. it would be Blackdeath 2.0.

 

[jaztermareal]

Yeah it's ironic that in trying to make people safe in the future, they are being potentially put at risk. Then there are the nefarious reasons to do it as you say. I'm sure both instances are happening. They could also be developing them and their vaccines as a form of defense in case other countries develop similar related viruses.

Humans aren't responsible enough to handle this kind of knowledge, same with nuclear weapons. We're far too naive, selfish and greedy.

At least with nukes they don't go around launching themselves.... viruses can leak from a single event and spread globally completely accidentally, so even worse than nukes.

 

[Rui Ram]

If we were serious people gain of function research would be the #1 question the world would be grappling with right now.

Instead very few are talking about it while the corporate media distracts us with non-issues.