what alot of people don't seem to realize is that there are some areas of research we ought not to pursue, because the consequences might be so dire:
The nightmare is that combined with genetic materials and thereby self-replicating, nanobots would be able to multiply themselves into a “gray goo” that could outperform photosynthesis and usurp the entire biosphere, including all edible plants and animals.
adapted from the new york times, 19 august 2002 Opposition to Nanotechnology
By BARNABY J. FEDER
The great Gray Goo debate is beginning to matter.
The controversy involves the potential perils of making molecular-size objects and devices, a field known as nanotechnology.
From its earliest days, nanotechnology has had its fear-mongers, warning of novel and terrifying risks.
Who can be sure how products so small that they would be invisible to the human eye will behave, particularly when the nanoworld's basic design elements — atoms and small molecules — are governed by the surreal laws of quantum mechanics rather than the more familiar Newtonian physics of large objects?
The ultimate nightmare is so-called Gray Goo catastrophe, in which self-replicating microscopic robots the size of bacteria fill the world and wipe out humanity.
. . . Monsanto and others interested in the technology . . .
editorial comment by me: is there no end to the evil ways of monsanto??more from
http://www.etcgroup.org/text/txt_article.asp?newsid=399Suddenly the nanotech industry and its friends are scrambling to pretend nanotech problems that have raised royal concerns exist far in the future or only in the pages of science fiction.
Everything is under control, they tell us, and there is no need to fear. The truth is that one mistake has already been committed - the mishandling of regulation and safety consideration of nanoparticles. Now, in the emerging field of nanobiotech, there may be more problems brewing. A second mistake may prove unforgivable. Grey Goo (the result of self-replicating nanomachines run amok) may sound like science fiction, but when biotech muscles in on the nano-act, Green Goo consequences are real cause for concern. This ETC Group Communiqué is a short overview of the Grey Goo / Green Goo debate and a warning that if techno-politicians overeagerly dismiss the Goo brouhaha, they do so at all our peril.
Nanotech bills itself as a "green" technology - one that can clean up the environment, improve health worldwide, and even end hunger. Mindful of another technology - biotechnology - that made many of the same promises and ran afoul of public concerns, the industry repeats the mantra that it will not make, and is not making, the same mistakes. So far, they are mistaken.
STRIKING MISTAKES: First, despite a quarter-century of lab work on nanoparticles, scientists failed to establish a common laboratory protocol to ensure the safety of workers exposed to particles. Then government allowed nanoparticles into consumer products in the absence of regulatory mechanisms. Particles that had been approved for consumer products at the micro- or macro- scale were not tested again when introduced into the same products at the nanoscale. Indeed, nano companies pooh-poohed the notion that nanoparticles need to be evaluated for their health and environmental impacts, despite that the impetus for their development stemmed from the radical changes that can happen when a substance is reduced to the nanoscale. Because quantum mechanics takes over at the nanoscale, there may be changes to a substance's conductivity, elasticity, reactivity, strength, color, and tolerance to temperature and pressure. Some nanoparticles can slip past immune systems and even cross through the blood-brain barrier undetected - great news for drug delivery, really bad news if the particles given carte blanche turn out to be toxic.
. . . more at the above-listed link.
WAKE UP PEOPLE, THE END OF THE WORLD IS AT HAND!!
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
