Being Reconstructed
Posted 8/16/11 , edited 8/17/11
How long does it take for someone from the past with a certain DNA sequence to be reconstructed again some time in the future? I know there are only so many combination of DNA sequences, therefore after a while a certain body from the past will get repeated again in the future with an exact DNA sequence.

Posted 8/16/11
Impossible theoretically. The videogame series Assassin's Creed has played with the thought of genetics being codes, which can be accessed and unlocked.

Besides, in hindsight, wouldn't you have become dirt or grass, or a tree? Becoming decomposed, eaten by worms, and shit out somewhere usually demeans any way of being reconstructed as a human.
35796 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Stoke, England
Offline
Posted 8/16/11
Well they say there's about 7 billion people, and apparently no DNA structures have been repeated apart from twins as far as we know, (well then again, one of those African babies who live seconds or minutes possibly might have) so it's probably AT LEAST once every 7 billion people...no, wait..I just thought of that off the top of my head. Ignore me.
54331 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / Under your skin.
Offline
Posted 8/16/11

Vega66 wrote:

Damn, it. Someone fix the tile for me. I have OCD, and my mistakes bug me.

OMG I laughed so hard! Somebody fix it!



CarboKill wrote:

Well they say there's about 7 billion people, and apparently no DNA structures have been repeated apart from twins as far as we know, (well then again, one of those African babies who live seconds or minutes possibly might have) so it's probably AT LEAST once every 7 billion people...no, wait..I just thought of that off the top of my head. Ignore me.




84302 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Colorado, USA
Offline
Posted 8/16/11 , edited 8/16/11
Actually it's probably impossible. I think you're forgetting that our genetics are always moving in a forward motion adapting to the most appropriate survival traits needed in the modern times. However this is a level of science that is still not fully known, and the experts still only have theories to go on.
17344 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Crapsack World
Offline
Posted 8/17/11
Artificially speaking, it is possible, but If it is done by natural means, the chance that it will occur is almost close to zero.
30236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
It doesn't matter.
Offline
Posted 8/17/11
I'm with Terragamerx on this. evolution prevents neanderthals from reappearing through natural means.
Posted 8/17/11 , edited 8/17/11

Sir_jamesalot wrote:

I'm with Terragamerx on this. evolution prevents neanderthals from reappearing through natural means.


Do you actually believe that evolution has a purpose and direction? It's mindless and random. We can easily evolve back into more simple and less intelligent beings if that is what is necessary to survive.

Posted 8/17/11 , edited 8/17/11

Vega66 wrote:


Sir_jamesalot wrote:

I'm with Terragamerx on this. evolution prevents neanderthals from reappearing through natural means.


Do you actually believe that evolution has a purpose and direction? It's mindless and random. We can easily evolve back into more simple and less intelligent beings if that is what is necessary to survive.



That's fallacious as all hell. Evolution doesn't revert back, it adapts. It goes forward with how environments. Besides, humans can't progress backwards into cavemen. Our situation might change and we may go back living in caves, but we've evolved. we wouldn't have a lifespan of 30/40 like the cavemen did, and we'd still be taller then they were. Guess why.

Trust me, Vega. I'm a Eugenicist.
Posted 8/17/11

Lauriet wrote:


Vega66 wrote:


Sir_jamesalot wrote:

I'm with Terragamerx on this. evolution prevents neanderthals from reappearing through natural means.


Do you actually believe that evolution has a purpose and direction? It's mindless and random. We can easily evolve back into more simple and less intelligent beings if that is what is necessary to survive.



That's fallacious as all hell. Evolution doesn't revert back, it adapts. It goes forward with how environments. Besides, humans can't progress backwards into cavemen. Our situation might change and we may go back living in caves, but we've evolved. we wouldn't have a lifespan of 30/40 like the cavemen did, and we'd still be taller then they were. Guess why.

Trust me, Vega. I'm a Eugenicist.


Oh, ok. You're the authority here. I'll take your word for it.

Posted 8/17/11

Vega66 wrote:

Oh, ok. You're the authority here. I'll take your word for it.



Think genetics as.... a large circle of dominos. Even if you flip one over, once the circle is complete the last one is on the first one you tipped over. Its default. Even if technology is fucked up and humanity is pretty muchs crewed back into beating eachother to death with bones and sharp rocks, our geentics would remain. Our biceps wouldn't become smaller, our spines would remain long, a perfectly healthy person would still live 60 years at least, and so on. We've evolved.

It isn't too hard to grasp how impossible it'd be for a person to be 'reconstructed' through antural means. even fi you are eaten by worms and shit out, grow into a tree, it'll just go back into being shit out and/or being used as lumber. Energyw e get from food is burnt up, becomes waste, and we dispose of our waste. A person being reborn isn't going to happen. I just don't see it happening.

30236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
It doesn't matter.
Offline
Posted 8/17/11
But we still have cloning.
So mabe we can clone beethoven's parents and naturaly reproduce another Ludwig.
35796 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Stoke, England
Offline
Posted 8/17/11
I think maybe this should have been placed in the Extended Discussion section.
85095 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Offline
Posted 8/17/11 , edited 8/17/11
I don't know. I just don't know. It could be or not.
You must be logged in to post.