On Tue, 18 May 2004 12:54:06 -0600, Wally Day <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Ingrid Bauer/Jean-Claude Catry <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> there is an essential difference between naturally evolving genetic and man
>> directed  genetic manipulation 
>
>I'm curious. When did man become not a part of nature? How do you know we
>are not just a "tool" being used to impart certain changes in the
>ecosystem?

This is a major point that is missed by most people on both ends of
the political/ideological spectrum.

Everything that is part of today's world is an inevitable result of
the past world.

Toxic waste is entirely "natural", because homo sapiens are biological
life forms.   Their actions are no less "natural" than those of the
spotted owl or the snail darter.

(In a similar way, those on the other end of the ideological spectrum
who want to return to the society of the 1950's, don't understand that
today's society was a direct result of the 1950's.)

>>humans are like any other species integral part of the web of life and to
>>stay healthy have to keep in dynamic balance with the whole .

On the contrary, the way of the natural world is that it does not care
about the individual.    "Life" does not care what happens to
individual life forms, as long as the species thrives.     Variations
that have less survival characteristics "naturally" die off.

As such, in order to stay healthy, humans need to use their superior
rational skills to investigate what is best for their own individual
health - which may or may not be the same as what is best for others
of their species, by the way.


--
Cheers,

Ken