<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_05_27_2219221</id>
	<title>Fluorescent Monkeys Cast Light On Human Disease</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1243428960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://hughpickens.com/" rel="nofollow">Hugh Pickens</a> writes <i>"BBC reports that a team of Japanese scientists has integrated a new gene for green fluorescent protein into the common marmoset, causing them to glow green under ultraviolet light, <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8070252.stm">creating second-generation, glow-in-the-dark monkeys</a> in what could be a powerful new tool in human disease research. Though primates modified to generate a glowing protein have been created before, these are the first to keep the change in their bloodlines. If a fluorescent protein gene can be introduced into the monkey genome and passed onto future generations, other genes could be too opening up a world of possibilities for medical research, such as the <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1189029/Glowing-monkeys-spark-genetical-engineering-debate.html">generation of specific monkey colonies containing genetic defects that mirror human diseases</a> aiding efforts to cure such diseases as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease. However many people are likely to find the routine use of monkeys in medical research far less acceptable than that of rodents, drawing action from animal rights activists. 'I'm worried that these steps are being taken without any overall public discussion about whether we want to go down that road. We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings,' says Dr David King, from the group <a href="http://www.hgalert.org/">Human Genetics Alert</a>. '"Slippery slope" is a quite inadequate description of the process, because it doesn't happen passively. People push it forward.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hugh Pickens writes " BBC reports that a team of Japanese scientists has integrated a new gene for green fluorescent protein into the common marmoset , causing them to glow green under ultraviolet light , creating second-generation , glow-in-the-dark monkeys in what could be a powerful new tool in human disease research .
Though primates modified to generate a glowing protein have been created before , these are the first to keep the change in their bloodlines .
If a fluorescent protein gene can be introduced into the monkey genome and passed onto future generations , other genes could be too opening up a world of possibilities for medical research , such as the generation of specific monkey colonies containing genetic defects that mirror human diseases aiding efforts to cure such diseases as Alzheimer 's and Parkinson 's disease .
However many people are likely to find the routine use of monkeys in medical research far less acceptable than that of rodents , drawing action from animal rights activists .
'I 'm worried that these steps are being taken without any overall public discussion about whether we want to go down that road .
We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings, ' says Dr David King , from the group Human Genetics Alert .
' " Slippery slope " is a quite inadequate description of the process , because it does n't happen passively .
People push it forward .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hugh Pickens writes "BBC reports that a team of Japanese scientists has integrated a new gene for green fluorescent protein into the common marmoset, causing them to glow green under ultraviolet light, creating second-generation, glow-in-the-dark monkeys in what could be a powerful new tool in human disease research.
Though primates modified to generate a glowing protein have been created before, these are the first to keep the change in their bloodlines.
If a fluorescent protein gene can be introduced into the monkey genome and passed onto future generations, other genes could be too opening up a world of possibilities for medical research, such as the generation of specific monkey colonies containing genetic defects that mirror human diseases aiding efforts to cure such diseases as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease.
However many people are likely to find the routine use of monkeys in medical research far less acceptable than that of rodents, drawing action from animal rights activists.
'I'm worried that these steps are being taken without any overall public discussion about whether we want to go down that road.
We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings,' says Dr David King, from the group Human Genetics Alert.
'"Slippery slope" is a quite inadequate description of the process, because it doesn't happen passively.
People push it forward.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28124209</id>
	<title>Re:Sigh....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243527960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The fight against gay marriage has nothing to do with two men or two women who want to marry.</p><p>It is all about money.</p><p>Married couples can get the retirement benefits and pensions of their spouses. This often includes some health care package. The common belief is that gay people run a higher risk for certain illnesses (think HIV). They do not want to cover that cost. The religious thing is just a cover.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The fight against gay marriage has nothing to do with two men or two women who want to marry.It is all about money.Married couples can get the retirement benefits and pensions of their spouses .
This often includes some health care package .
The common belief is that gay people run a higher risk for certain illnesses ( think HIV ) .
They do not want to cover that cost .
The religious thing is just a cover .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fight against gay marriage has nothing to do with two men or two women who want to marry.It is all about money.Married couples can get the retirement benefits and pensions of their spouses.
This often includes some health care package.
The common belief is that gay people run a higher risk for certain illnesses (think HIV).
They do not want to cover that cost.
The religious thing is just a cover.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118015</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901</id>
	<title>Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Pluvius</author>
	<datestamp>1243433280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings</i></p><p>And eradicating genetic disease and improving humanity to the peak of its potential would be bad why, again?  Here's a hint: The reason why the world of Gattaca is dystopic isn't because of genetic engineering.</p><p>Rob</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beingsAnd eradicating genetic disease and improving humanity to the peak of its potential would be bad why , again ?
Here 's a hint : The reason why the world of Gattaca is dystopic is n't because of genetic engineering.Rob</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beingsAnd eradicating genetic disease and improving humanity to the peak of its potential would be bad why, again?
Here's a hint: The reason why the world of Gattaca is dystopic isn't because of genetic engineering.Rob</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243435500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's also the world of... Brave New World.</p><p>By unfortunate genetic lottery, we have people suited to manual labor, manufacturing and other undesirable jobs.  In addition, we dehumanize people if they're "designed."  Think about the problems we have when clothing/electronics/houses go out of style.  Now think about your kids.  Do you want them to "go out of style?"  We'll only further objectify people.</p><p>Sure, it sucks if you're ugly. But at least you're unique.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's also the world of... Brave New World.By unfortunate genetic lottery , we have people suited to manual labor , manufacturing and other undesirable jobs .
In addition , we dehumanize people if they 're " designed .
" Think about the problems we have when clothing/electronics/houses go out of style .
Now think about your kids .
Do you want them to " go out of style ?
" We 'll only further objectify people.Sure , it sucks if you 're ugly .
But at least you 're unique .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's also the world of... Brave New World.By unfortunate genetic lottery, we have people suited to manual labor, manufacturing and other undesirable jobs.
In addition, we dehumanize people if they're "designed.
"  Think about the problems we have when clothing/electronics/houses go out of style.
Now think about your kids.
Do you want them to "go out of style?
"  We'll only further objectify people.Sure, it sucks if you're ugly.
But at least you're unique.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118011</id>
	<title>Transgenic Cures</title>
	<author>telomerewhythere</author>
	<datestamp>1243433940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If they can put in genetic code to embryos, I want Gattaca!!  Even better, I want those virii to remove Male Pattern Balding, a redhead's suseptability to skin cancer, etc.  I know, what could possibly go wrong?!?  I might just be able to live forever.
<p>Oh the tgHumanity!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they can put in genetic code to embryos , I want Gattaca ! !
Even better , I want those virii to remove Male Pattern Balding , a redhead 's suseptability to skin cancer , etc .
I know , what could possibly go wrong ? ! ?
I might just be able to live forever .
Oh the tgHumanity !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they can put in genetic code to embryos, I want Gattaca!!
Even better, I want those virii to remove Male Pattern Balding, a redhead's suseptability to skin cancer, etc.
I know, what could possibly go wrong?!?
I might just be able to live forever.
Oh the tgHumanity!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118379</id>
	<title>It's almost like they were trying to draw fire...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1243437300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Curiously, the internal numbering scheme used in this research is practically handing paranoia fuel to a certain class of anti-science forces on a silver platter.<br> <br>
The only viable male marmoset produced by the experiment was <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/drugmonkey/2009/05/oh\_boy\_here\_comes\_the\_human\_cl.php" title="scienceblogs.com">Code named "666"</a> [scienceblogs.com]. Are they trying to rouse the god squad?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Curiously , the internal numbering scheme used in this research is practically handing paranoia fuel to a certain class of anti-science forces on a silver platter .
The only viable male marmoset produced by the experiment was Code named " 666 " [ scienceblogs.com ] .
Are they trying to rouse the god squad ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Curiously, the internal numbering scheme used in this research is practically handing paranoia fuel to a certain class of anti-science forces on a silver platter.
The only viable male marmoset produced by the experiment was Code named "666" [scienceblogs.com].
Are they trying to rouse the god squad?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117923</id>
	<title>Raise your hands</title>
	<author>MMC Monster</author>
	<datestamp>1243433400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many of you would pay extra for a child that would fluoresce?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many of you would pay extra for a child that would fluoresce ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many of you would pay extra for a child that would fluoresce?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119455</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1243447920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There's also the world of... Brave New World.</p></div><p>Ah, TWO fictional stories.  Well then it's pretty much a dead certainty.</p><p>Wait a minute... terminator and matrix... my god, I need to stop typing and destroy my computer RIGHT NOW!</p><p><div class="quote"><p>By unfortunate genetic lottery, we have people suited to manual labor, manufacturing and other undesirable jobs. In addition, we dehumanize people if they're "designed." Think about the problems we have when clothing/electronics/houses go out of style. Now think about your kids. Do you want them to "go out of style?" We'll only further objectify people.</p></div><p>"go out of style?"  Exactly how?  Because if we start designing our kids to have floral print skin, that would be one thing, but not having cystic fibrosis probably isn't going to go out of style ever, and I think people are going to tend to leave superficial features alone, focusing more on diseases.  And maybe height, weight, and intelligence, but those also probably aren't going to go "out of style."</p><p>Dehumanizing sounds convincing until you realize people already do that to ugly people.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's also the world of... Brave New World.Ah , TWO fictional stories .
Well then it 's pretty much a dead certainty.Wait a minute... terminator and matrix... my god , I need to stop typing and destroy my computer RIGHT NOW ! By unfortunate genetic lottery , we have people suited to manual labor , manufacturing and other undesirable jobs .
In addition , we dehumanize people if they 're " designed .
" Think about the problems we have when clothing/electronics/houses go out of style .
Now think about your kids .
Do you want them to " go out of style ?
" We 'll only further objectify people .
" go out of style ?
" Exactly how ?
Because if we start designing our kids to have floral print skin , that would be one thing , but not having cystic fibrosis probably is n't going to go out of style ever , and I think people are going to tend to leave superficial features alone , focusing more on diseases .
And maybe height , weight , and intelligence , but those also probably are n't going to go " out of style .
" Dehumanizing sounds convincing until you realize people already do that to ugly people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's also the world of... Brave New World.Ah, TWO fictional stories.
Well then it's pretty much a dead certainty.Wait a minute... terminator and matrix... my god, I need to stop typing and destroy my computer RIGHT NOW!By unfortunate genetic lottery, we have people suited to manual labor, manufacturing and other undesirable jobs.
In addition, we dehumanize people if they're "designed.
" Think about the problems we have when clothing/electronics/houses go out of style.
Now think about your kids.
Do you want them to "go out of style?
" We'll only further objectify people.
"go out of style?
"  Exactly how?
Because if we start designing our kids to have floral print skin, that would be one thing, but not having cystic fibrosis probably isn't going to go out of style ever, and I think people are going to tend to leave superficial features alone, focusing more on diseases.
And maybe height, weight, and intelligence, but those also probably aren't going to go "out of style.
"Dehumanizing sounds convincing until you realize people already do that to ugly people.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119469</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>ChromeAeonium</author>
	<datestamp>1243448040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you joking?  Do you know how many varieties of apple there are?  Wild apples are barely half the size and aren't nearly as sweet.  Think pears just happened?  Uncultivated ones are  gritty and sand-like.  Ever notice how there's no seeds in your banana?  Think wild ones are seedless?  Corn?  Not even naturally occurring.  Wild wheat has a fraction of the yield of newer varieties.  Look at all the ways humans have improved Brassica oleracea (hint: do you think broccoli, cauliflower, kale, cabbage, and brussels sprouts just happened?).  Potatoes, carrots, oranges, nectarines, tomatoes, melons, barley, jeez, this post could go on and on, and that's just common food crops.  To act like humans don't improve natural things is just bafflingly ignorant.  People should really learn the history of their food sometime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you joking ?
Do you know how many varieties of apple there are ?
Wild apples are barely half the size and are n't nearly as sweet .
Think pears just happened ?
Uncultivated ones are gritty and sand-like .
Ever notice how there 's no seeds in your banana ?
Think wild ones are seedless ?
Corn ? Not even naturally occurring .
Wild wheat has a fraction of the yield of newer varieties .
Look at all the ways humans have improved Brassica oleracea ( hint : do you think broccoli , cauliflower , kale , cabbage , and brussels sprouts just happened ? ) .
Potatoes , carrots , oranges , nectarines , tomatoes , melons , barley , jeez , this post could go on and on , and that 's just common food crops .
To act like humans do n't improve natural things is just bafflingly ignorant .
People should really learn the history of their food sometime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you joking?
Do you know how many varieties of apple there are?
Wild apples are barely half the size and aren't nearly as sweet.
Think pears just happened?
Uncultivated ones are  gritty and sand-like.
Ever notice how there's no seeds in your banana?
Think wild ones are seedless?
Corn?  Not even naturally occurring.
Wild wheat has a fraction of the yield of newer varieties.
Look at all the ways humans have improved Brassica oleracea (hint: do you think broccoli, cauliflower, kale, cabbage, and brussels sprouts just happened?).
Potatoes, carrots, oranges, nectarines, tomatoes, melons, barley, jeez, this post could go on and on, and that's just common food crops.
To act like humans don't improve natural things is just bafflingly ignorant.
People should really learn the history of their food sometime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118309</id>
	<title>The Island of Dr Moroe (Japan)</title>
	<author>moon3</author>
	<datestamp>1243436700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean this is beyond believe they do this to those poor creatures.<br> <br>This only shows their incompetence in model scenarios, so they just modify the DNA of primates and watch what happens, that is pretty low and disgusting, terrible trial and error approach. <br> <br>But I see the point, these gruesome Japanese scientists probably want to advance themselves from being the missing link between humans and monkeys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean this is beyond believe they do this to those poor creatures .
This only shows their incompetence in model scenarios , so they just modify the DNA of primates and watch what happens , that is pretty low and disgusting , terrible trial and error approach .
But I see the point , these gruesome Japanese scientists probably want to advance themselves from being the missing link between humans and monkeys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean this is beyond believe they do this to those poor creatures.
This only shows their incompetence in model scenarios, so they just modify the DNA of primates and watch what happens, that is pretty low and disgusting, terrible trial and error approach.
But I see the point, these gruesome Japanese scientists probably want to advance themselves from being the missing link between humans and monkeys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121153</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Inda</author>
	<datestamp>1243509540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I do selective breeding in my garden. The joy of using plants is that I'm already on 5th generation (sweet peas) after five years.<br><br>Wild parsnips can be turned into 'normal' parsnips after about a dozen generations.<br><br>It just seems like the right thing to do: find a nice plant that shows all the characteristic I'm after, collect the seeds, cool, sow, rince and repeat. Maybe one day I can get one named after me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do selective breeding in my garden .
The joy of using plants is that I 'm already on 5th generation ( sweet peas ) after five years.Wild parsnips can be turned into 'normal ' parsnips after about a dozen generations.It just seems like the right thing to do : find a nice plant that shows all the characteristic I 'm after , collect the seeds , cool , sow , rince and repeat .
Maybe one day I can get one named after me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do selective breeding in my garden.
The joy of using plants is that I'm already on 5th generation (sweet peas) after five years.Wild parsnips can be turned into 'normal' parsnips after about a dozen generations.It just seems like the right thing to do: find a nice plant that shows all the characteristic I'm after, collect the seeds, cool, sow, rince and repeat.
Maybe one day I can get one named after me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118557</id>
	<title>Re:The path less traveled</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243438740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; </p><p><div class="quote"><p>I submit we have already, (and even within one generation) passed that fork in the road. Unless you think these people are doing all this research because they favor monkeys?</p></div><p>I don't look at it as a fork in the road (or choice) but more as a one way trip just hold on for dear life.</p><p>Yes some horrible things are going to happen in the process but the process is indivertible and outcome will be out of necessity.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>  I submit we have already , ( and even within one generation ) passed that fork in the road .
Unless you think these people are doing all this research because they favor monkeys ? I do n't look at it as a fork in the road ( or choice ) but more as a one way trip just hold on for dear life.Yes some horrible things are going to happen in the process but the process is indivertible and outcome will be out of necessity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  I submit we have already, (and even within one generation) passed that fork in the road.
Unless you think these people are doing all this research because they favor monkeys?I don't look at it as a fork in the road (or choice) but more as a one way trip just hold on for dear life.Yes some horrible things are going to happen in the process but the process is indivertible and outcome will be out of necessity.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118107</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118321</id>
	<title>Re:Fluorescent monkeys? Bah</title>
	<author>SEWilco</author>
	<datestamp>1243436820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's the 21st Century.  Where are my phosphorescent flying monkeys?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the 21st Century .
Where are my phosphorescent flying monkeys ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the 21st Century.
Where are my phosphorescent flying monkeys?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118043</id>
	<title>Re:Raise your hands</title>
	<author>IHateEverybody</author>
	<datestamp>1243434300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No but I'd definitely pay extra for a fluorescent monkey.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No but I 'd definitely pay extra for a fluorescent monkey .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No but I'd definitely pay extra for a fluorescent monkey.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28129847</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243503780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a good thing you've been staying away from cooked food, you live outdoors, unsheltered, and had this message spontaneously appear on a worldwide network of networks of computers built from materials made from a bunch of sand, rocks, and raw ore. If you hadn't, this comment would be COMPLETELY asinine.</p><p>I'd love to continue this discussion, but I have to walk home from work using shoes to protect my feet from injury, clothing to protect me from the elements, and roads built to enable commerce. I would hate to be late for the cooked dinner I'll be eating, made from meat and veggies delivered in refrigerated trucks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a good thing you 've been staying away from cooked food , you live outdoors , unsheltered , and had this message spontaneously appear on a worldwide network of networks of computers built from materials made from a bunch of sand , rocks , and raw ore. If you had n't , this comment would be COMPLETELY asinine.I 'd love to continue this discussion , but I have to walk home from work using shoes to protect my feet from injury , clothing to protect me from the elements , and roads built to enable commerce .
I would hate to be late for the cooked dinner I 'll be eating , made from meat and veggies delivered in refrigerated trucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a good thing you've been staying away from cooked food, you live outdoors, unsheltered, and had this message spontaneously appear on a worldwide network of networks of computers built from materials made from a bunch of sand, rocks, and raw ore. If you hadn't, this comment would be COMPLETELY asinine.I'd love to continue this discussion, but I have to walk home from work using shoes to protect my feet from injury, clothing to protect me from the elements, and roads built to enable commerce.
I would hate to be late for the cooked dinner I'll be eating, made from meat and veggies delivered in refrigerated trucks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28120081</id>
	<title>Re:Oblig...</title>
	<author>OrangeCatholic</author>
	<datestamp>1243541580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>My glowing dick casts light on human jealousy?
<br> <br>
How about,
<br> <br>
A generation of specific monkey colonies containing genetic defects that mirror human diseases is aiding efforts to cure such diseases as your mom's Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease?
<br> <br>
I mean, she <i>is</i> on her way over here.  The question is, does Alzheimer's let me bang her in the ear?</htmltext>
<tokenext>My glowing dick casts light on human jealousy ?
How about , A generation of specific monkey colonies containing genetic defects that mirror human diseases is aiding efforts to cure such diseases as your mom 's Alzheimer 's and Parkinson 's disease ?
I mean , she is on her way over here .
The question is , does Alzheimer 's let me bang her in the ear ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My glowing dick casts light on human jealousy?
How about,
 
A generation of specific monkey colonies containing genetic defects that mirror human diseases is aiding efforts to cure such diseases as your mom's Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease?
I mean, she is on her way over here.
The question is, does Alzheimer's let me bang her in the ear?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118115</id>
	<title>I'm not even going to read the summary...</title>
	<author>joebok</author>
	<datestamp>1243434960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... let alone the article.  Why spoil a great headline?  Heck, I just like the "Fluorescent Monkeys" part.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... let alone the article .
Why spoil a great headline ?
Heck , I just like the " Fluorescent Monkeys " part .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... let alone the article.
Why spoil a great headline?
Heck, I just like the "Fluorescent Monkeys" part.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118237</id>
	<title>Beige?</title>
	<author>florescent\_beige</author>
	<datestamp>1243436040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But are the fluorescent monkeys beige?</htmltext>
<tokenext>But are the fluorescent monkeys beige ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But are the fluorescent monkeys beige?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28120369</id>
	<title>Re:Just a matter of time</title>
	<author>anonymous cowshed</author>
	<datestamp>1243501740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It will be soon. Just imagine how convenient it would be for some wealthy people, to be able to find Bubbles in a darkened room.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It will be soon .
Just imagine how convenient it would be for some wealthy people , to be able to find Bubbles in a darkened room .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It will be soon.
Just imagine how convenient it would be for some wealthy people, to be able to find Bubbles in a darkened room.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118105</id>
	<title>Animal rights activists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243434900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>However many people are likely to find the routine use of monkeys in medical research far less acceptable than that of rodents, drawing action from animal rights activists.</p></div><p>And once you have the attention of the animal rights activists, the harsh reality is that your research involves monkeys that fucking glow in the dark so it's not like they're easy to hide or anything.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>However many people are likely to find the routine use of monkeys in medical research far less acceptable than that of rodents , drawing action from animal rights activists.And once you have the attention of the animal rights activists , the harsh reality is that your research involves monkeys that fucking glow in the dark so it 's not like they 're easy to hide or anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However many people are likely to find the routine use of monkeys in medical research far less acceptable than that of rodents, drawing action from animal rights activists.And once you have the attention of the animal rights activists, the harsh reality is that your research involves monkeys that fucking glow in the dark so it's not like they're easy to hide or anything.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117959</id>
	<title>Imagine this in the closet.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243433640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Takin' the <a href="http://familyguy.wikia.com/wiki/Evil\_Monkey" title="wikia.com" rel="nofollow">evil monkey</a> [wikia.com] to the next level!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Takin ' the evil monkey [ wikia.com ] to the next level !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Takin' the evil monkey [wikia.com] to the next level!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117921</id>
	<title>We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards t</title>
	<author>wideBlueSkies</author>
	<datestamp>1243433400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>KHANNNNN!!!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>KHANNNNN ! ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>KHANNNNN!!!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118553</id>
	<title>Re:The Island of Dr Moroe (Japan)</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1243438740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Um, its called learning. Think of it this way, its like a programming language that you have no clue what it does. So you see a line of code, find a variable, think Hm, thats a 1, if we make it be a 0 what happens? So you do that and compile it, suddenly the background of the program turns transparent. You figure out what that does. Its the same thing here, manipulate enough variables and you get a lot of knowledge.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , its called learning .
Think of it this way , its like a programming language that you have no clue what it does .
So you see a line of code , find a variable , think Hm , thats a 1 , if we make it be a 0 what happens ?
So you do that and compile it , suddenly the background of the program turns transparent .
You figure out what that does .
Its the same thing here , manipulate enough variables and you get a lot of knowledge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, its called learning.
Think of it this way, its like a programming language that you have no clue what it does.
So you see a line of code, find a variable, think Hm, thats a 1, if we make it be a 0 what happens?
So you do that and compile it, suddenly the background of the program turns transparent.
You figure out what that does.
Its the same thing here, manipulate enough variables and you get a lot of knowledge.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28136789</id>
	<title>Re:Fluorescent monkeys? Bah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243600080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Smithers, release the winged glowing monkeys!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Smithers , release the winged glowing monkeys !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Smithers, release the winged glowing monkeys!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119331</id>
	<title>Re:Slippery Slope is a Logical Fallacy</title>
	<author>rxan</author>
	<datestamp>1243446720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering...</p></div><p>It IS genetic engineering. That is a proper equation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering...It IS genetic engineering .
That is a proper equation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering...It IS genetic engineering.
That is a proper equation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118443</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118367</id>
	<title>Re:Fluorescent monkeys? Bah</title>
	<author>TinBromide</author>
	<datestamp>1243437240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I want to do this to my future, hypothetical kids.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want to do this to my future , hypothetical kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want to do this to my future, hypothetical kids.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118107</id>
	<title>The path less traveled</title>
	<author>NemoinSpace</author>
	<datestamp>1243434900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings," says Dr David King</p></div></blockquote><p>
I submit we have already, (and even within one generation) passed that fork in the road.  Unless you think these people are doing all this research because they favor monkeys?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings , " says Dr David King I submit we have already , ( and even within one generation ) passed that fork in the road .
Unless you think these people are doing all this research because they favor monkeys ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings," says Dr David King
I submit we have already, (and even within one generation) passed that fork in the road.
Unless you think these people are doing all this research because they favor monkeys?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118665</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>glwtta</author>
	<datestamp>1243439580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>In addition, we dehumanize people if they're "designed."</i>
<br> <br>
Shit, we do? I didn't even know there were "designed" people, and here I am, dehumanizing them!</htmltext>
<tokenext>In addition , we dehumanize people if they 're " designed .
" Shit , we do ?
I did n't even know there were " designed " people , and here I am , dehumanizing them !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In addition, we dehumanize people if they're "designed.
"
 
Shit, we do?
I didn't even know there were "designed" people, and here I am, dehumanizing them!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117895</id>
	<title>Crunchy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243433220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do they taste like pickles, too?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do they taste like pickles , too ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do they taste like pickles, too?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118621</id>
	<title>Re:Oblig...</title>
	<author>nametaken</author>
	<datestamp>1243439220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll welcome them when they're two-assed monkeys.  Those are so <i>obviously</i> more useful for research in human diseases.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll welcome them when they 're two-assed monkeys .
Those are so obviously more useful for research in human diseases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll welcome them when they're two-assed monkeys.
Those are so obviously more useful for research in human diseases.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28120321</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243544340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... and what are we doing to those food stuffs now?  Engineering further (disease resistance, since as non-natural occurring varieties, grown in manners unnatural, they are prone to pathogens more easily);  engineering for disease and pest control hardieness (read:  poison resistant), commonly using bacteria genetics (which may very well be interfering with our gut bacteria, changing our abilities to digest those foodstuffs and causing genetic abnormalities in us or at least making us unhealthy).  Oh yeah, I want that kind of science improving the human genome.  It's going to happen, I realize, but I don't gotta like it (though bigger muscles and ability to jump and not needing glasses would be cool.  Oh, and healthy babies, yeah, that too).  I'm just scared of people with self serving motives in places of power, they always fuck things up for everyone.  BTW, for illnesses beyond the womb, stem cells from our own living bodies show potential for health restoration, why use aborted fetus stem cells?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... and what are we doing to those food stuffs now ?
Engineering further ( disease resistance , since as non-natural occurring varieties , grown in manners unnatural , they are prone to pathogens more easily ) ; engineering for disease and pest control hardieness ( read : poison resistant ) , commonly using bacteria genetics ( which may very well be interfering with our gut bacteria , changing our abilities to digest those foodstuffs and causing genetic abnormalities in us or at least making us unhealthy ) .
Oh yeah , I want that kind of science improving the human genome .
It 's going to happen , I realize , but I do n't got ta like it ( though bigger muscles and ability to jump and not needing glasses would be cool .
Oh , and healthy babies , yeah , that too ) .
I 'm just scared of people with self serving motives in places of power , they always fuck things up for everyone .
BTW , for illnesses beyond the womb , stem cells from our own living bodies show potential for health restoration , why use aborted fetus stem cells ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and what are we doing to those food stuffs now?
Engineering further (disease resistance, since as non-natural occurring varieties, grown in manners unnatural, they are prone to pathogens more easily);  engineering for disease and pest control hardieness (read:  poison resistant), commonly using bacteria genetics (which may very well be interfering with our gut bacteria, changing our abilities to digest those foodstuffs and causing genetic abnormalities in us or at least making us unhealthy).
Oh yeah, I want that kind of science improving the human genome.
It's going to happen, I realize, but I don't gotta like it (though bigger muscles and ability to jump and not needing glasses would be cool.
Oh, and healthy babies, yeah, that too).
I'm just scared of people with self serving motives in places of power, they always fuck things up for everyone.
BTW, for illnesses beyond the womb, stem cells from our own living bodies show potential for health restoration, why use aborted fetus stem cells?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28136023</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Biotech9</author>
	<datestamp>1243589700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My favourite example of this is the Dutch turning carrots orange in a show of nationalism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My favourite example of this is the Dutch turning carrots orange in a show of nationalism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My favourite example of this is the Dutch turning carrots orange in a show of nationalism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117885</id>
	<title>Just a matter of time</title>
	<author>The\_mad\_linguist</author>
	<datestamp>1243433100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, how long do you think it'll be before decedents of these 'somehow' hit the exotic pet trade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , how long do you think it 'll be before decedents of these 'somehow ' hit the exotic pet trade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, how long do you think it'll be before decedents of these 'somehow' hit the exotic pet trade.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117957</id>
	<title>Re:Raise your hands</title>
	<author>aereinha</author>
	<datestamp>1243433580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>At least you wouldn't lose them in the dark.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At least you would n't lose them in the dark .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least you wouldn't lose them in the dark.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119001</id>
	<title>Re:Slippery Slope is a Logical Fallacy</title>
	<author>benjamindees</author>
	<datestamp>1243443180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The slippery slope is not a logical fallacy in this instance, and in fact is not a fallacy in most instances in which it is used.  The entire argument just isn't usually spelled out.  Most people are able to fill in the blanks.</p><p>1) Absent effective regulation, in a free-market economy, activities which are profitable will occur.<br>2) Human genetic engineering is a profitable activity.<br>3) Technological advances lessen the barriers to profitability of any activity.<br>4) Humans and monkeys are genetically similar.<br>5) Medical research on monkeys is widely cross-applicable to humans.</p><p>Any and all of these premises may be flawed in the singular sense, but in the general sense they are all true.  And this ultimately means that, absent effective regulation, genetic engineering of primates will likely help lead to genetic engineering of humans.  100\% effective regulation doesn't exist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The slippery slope is not a logical fallacy in this instance , and in fact is not a fallacy in most instances in which it is used .
The entire argument just is n't usually spelled out .
Most people are able to fill in the blanks.1 ) Absent effective regulation , in a free-market economy , activities which are profitable will occur.2 ) Human genetic engineering is a profitable activity.3 ) Technological advances lessen the barriers to profitability of any activity.4 ) Humans and monkeys are genetically similar.5 ) Medical research on monkeys is widely cross-applicable to humans.Any and all of these premises may be flawed in the singular sense , but in the general sense they are all true .
And this ultimately means that , absent effective regulation , genetic engineering of primates will likely help lead to genetic engineering of humans .
100 \ % effective regulation does n't exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The slippery slope is not a logical fallacy in this instance, and in fact is not a fallacy in most instances in which it is used.
The entire argument just isn't usually spelled out.
Most people are able to fill in the blanks.1) Absent effective regulation, in a free-market economy, activities which are profitable will occur.2) Human genetic engineering is a profitable activity.3) Technological advances lessen the barriers to profitability of any activity.4) Humans and monkeys are genetically similar.5) Medical research on monkeys is widely cross-applicable to humans.Any and all of these premises may be flawed in the singular sense, but in the general sense they are all true.
And this ultimately means that, absent effective regulation, genetic engineering of primates will likely help lead to genetic engineering of humans.
100\% effective regulation doesn't exist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118443</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118389</id>
	<title>Glowing humans</title>
	<author>nausea\_malvarma</author>
	<datestamp>1243437360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Humans are a type of primate, no? If we can make glowing monkeys, can't we make glowing humans? For one, it would solve the animal right's issues if we tested the stuff on humans (we could ask animal rights activists to volunteer). And second, I think it would be cool if we could glow under fluorescent lights.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Humans are a type of primate , no ?
If we can make glowing monkeys , ca n't we make glowing humans ?
For one , it would solve the animal right 's issues if we tested the stuff on humans ( we could ask animal rights activists to volunteer ) .
And second , I think it would be cool if we could glow under fluorescent lights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Humans are a type of primate, no?
If we can make glowing monkeys, can't we make glowing humans?
For one, it would solve the animal right's issues if we tested the stuff on humans (we could ask animal rights activists to volunteer).
And second, I think it would be cool if we could glow under fluorescent lights.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118629</id>
	<title>Re:Just a matter of time</title>
	<author>mr\_rarr</author>
	<datestamp>1243439340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, how long do you think it'll be before decedents of these 'somehow' hit the exotic pet trade.</p></div><p>Already done... GlowFish.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GloFish" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GloFish</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , how long do you think it 'll be before decedents of these 'somehow ' hit the exotic pet trade.Already done... GlowFish.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GloFish [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, how long do you think it'll be before decedents of these 'somehow' hit the exotic pet trade.Already done... GlowFish.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GloFish [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118899</id>
	<title>Re:Oblig...</title>
	<author>Rob Riggs</author>
	<datestamp>1243441980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Fluorescent Monkey Overlords</i> would be a great name for a band.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fluorescent Monkey Overlords would be a great name for a band .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fluorescent Monkey Overlords would be a great name for a band.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118205</id>
	<title>Re:Just a matter of time</title>
	<author>aethelwyrd</author>
	<datestamp>1243435800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I want a pink fluorescent monkey and I will love him and pet him and I will call him George.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want a pink fluorescent monkey and I will love him and pet him and I will call him George .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want a pink fluorescent monkey and I will love him and pet him and I will call him George.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28123865</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>BlackSnake112</author>
	<datestamp>1243526520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sure, it sucks if you're ugly. But at least you're unique.</p></div><p>I'd rather be good looking and common then ugly and unique.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , it sucks if you 're ugly .
But at least you 're unique.I 'd rather be good looking and common then ugly and unique .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, it sucks if you're ugly.
But at least you're unique.I'd rather be good looking and common then ugly and unique.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853</id>
	<title>Oblig...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243432860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I for one welcome our glowing primate overlords?........</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one welcome our glowing primate overlords ? ....... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one welcome our glowing primate overlords?........</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118443</id>
	<title>Slippery Slope is a Logical Fallacy</title>
	<author>Afforess</author>
	<datestamp>1243437900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings</p></div><p>

This argument is correctly labeled as a "slippery slope" argument, but what the author fails to mention is that "slippery slope" arguments are part of a group of arguments known as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery\_slope#The\_slippery\_slope\_as\_fallacy" title="wikipedia.org"> logical fallacy's.</a> [wikipedia.org] The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering and then assumes that genetic engineering on other organisms, namely humans, is inevitable; since human genetic engineering is bad, then all genetic engineering MUST be bad. This is illogical.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings This argument is correctly labeled as a " slippery slope " argument , but what the author fails to mention is that " slippery slope " arguments are part of a group of arguments known as logical fallacy 's .
[ wikipedia.org ] The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering and then assumes that genetic engineering on other organisms , namely humans , is inevitable ; since human genetic engineering is bad , then all genetic engineering MUST be bad .
This is illogical .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings

This argument is correctly labeled as a "slippery slope" argument, but what the author fails to mention is that "slippery slope" arguments are part of a group of arguments known as  logical fallacy's.
[wikipedia.org] The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering and then assumes that genetic engineering on other organisms, namely humans, is inevitable; since human genetic engineering is bad, then all genetic engineering MUST be bad.
This is illogical.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118831</id>
	<title>Re:Slippery Slope is a Logical Fallacy</title>
	<author>The Famous Brett Wat</author>
	<datestamp>1243441260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...what the author fails to mention is that "slippery slope" arguments are part of a group of arguments known as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery\_slope#The\_slippery\_slope\_as\_fallacy" title="wikipedia.org"> logical fallacy's.</a> [wikipedia.org]</p> </div><p>It's only a logical fallacy if it's presented as a logical argument. I don't see that here: I see a concern that although the thing is not bad in and of itself, it may lead to a trend that is. That's not a logical fallacy, it's a reasonable concern which arises from taking a long-term view. One could argue whether it's a valid concern, or whether the potential benefits outweigh the potential risks, but to cry "logical fallacy" here is just an attempt to dismiss the objection without discussing its actual merits.</p><p>Some "logical fallacies" are perfectly good rhetorical devices when used as such. Learn the difference. Also learn to use apostrophes, for Pete's sake.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...what the author fails to mention is that " slippery slope " arguments are part of a group of arguments known as logical fallacy 's .
[ wikipedia.org ] It 's only a logical fallacy if it 's presented as a logical argument .
I do n't see that here : I see a concern that although the thing is not bad in and of itself , it may lead to a trend that is .
That 's not a logical fallacy , it 's a reasonable concern which arises from taking a long-term view .
One could argue whether it 's a valid concern , or whether the potential benefits outweigh the potential risks , but to cry " logical fallacy " here is just an attempt to dismiss the objection without discussing its actual merits.Some " logical fallacies " are perfectly good rhetorical devices when used as such .
Learn the difference .
Also learn to use apostrophes , for Pete 's sake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...what the author fails to mention is that "slippery slope" arguments are part of a group of arguments known as  logical fallacy's.
[wikipedia.org] It's only a logical fallacy if it's presented as a logical argument.
I don't see that here: I see a concern that although the thing is not bad in and of itself, it may lead to a trend that is.
That's not a logical fallacy, it's a reasonable concern which arises from taking a long-term view.
One could argue whether it's a valid concern, or whether the potential benefits outweigh the potential risks, but to cry "logical fallacy" here is just an attempt to dismiss the objection without discussing its actual merits.Some "logical fallacies" are perfectly good rhetorical devices when used as such.
Learn the difference.
Also learn to use apostrophes, for Pete's sake.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118443</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117965</id>
	<title>Earth-Friendly Proposition?</title>
	<author>XPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1243433640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use the monkeys as light bulbs?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use the monkeys as light bulbs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use the monkeys as light bulbs?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121029</id>
	<title>Re:Oblig...</title>
	<author>SynthaxError</author>
	<datestamp>1243508400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can bite its shiny ape ass!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can bite its shiny ape ass !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can bite its shiny ape ass!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28124877</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Scrameustache</author>
	<datestamp>1243530540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I was incredibly disappointed with how Gattaca handled its genetic engineering premise.</p></div><p>I am incredibly disapointed in your inability to understand Gattaca's character development premise.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was incredibly disappointed with how Gattaca handled its genetic engineering premise.I am incredibly disapointed in your inability to understand Gattaca 's character development premise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was incredibly disappointed with how Gattaca handled its genetic engineering premise.I am incredibly disapointed in your inability to understand Gattaca's character development premise.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118547</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243438680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's interesting about Gattaca (aside from nature/nurture arguments) is that they engineered people not just to eliminate physical defects and disease (great), but also with some sort of ideal human being in mind (perhaps not so great).  eg:  They eliminated genes 'responsible' for risk taking behavior, which is why the main character was always able to kick his genetically engineered brother's ass at swimming.. likewise why he could go farther than his brother ever could.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's interesting about Gattaca ( aside from nature/nurture arguments ) is that they engineered people not just to eliminate physical defects and disease ( great ) , but also with some sort of ideal human being in mind ( perhaps not so great ) .
eg : They eliminated genes 'responsible ' for risk taking behavior , which is why the main character was always able to kick his genetically engineered brother 's ass at swimming.. likewise why he could go farther than his brother ever could .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's interesting about Gattaca (aside from nature/nurture arguments) is that they engineered people not just to eliminate physical defects and disease (great), but also with some sort of ideal human being in mind (perhaps not so great).
eg:  They eliminated genes 'responsible' for risk taking behavior, which is why the main character was always able to kick his genetically engineered brother's ass at swimming.. likewise why he could go farther than his brother ever could.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121573</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>misexistentialist</author>
	<datestamp>1243514220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like all evolution, food improvement is relative. We tend to select for increased yields or reduced spoilage, but that might mean flavor or nutrition are diminished. And many domesticated plants require intense cultivation which degrades the environment. It's great that bananas don't have seeds, but they are about to go extinct from a fungal disease because they are so refined.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like all evolution , food improvement is relative .
We tend to select for increased yields or reduced spoilage , but that might mean flavor or nutrition are diminished .
And many domesticated plants require intense cultivation which degrades the environment .
It 's great that bananas do n't have seeds , but they are about to go extinct from a fungal disease because they are so refined .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like all evolution, food improvement is relative.
We tend to select for increased yields or reduced spoilage, but that might mean flavor or nutrition are diminished.
And many domesticated plants require intense cultivation which degrades the environment.
It's great that bananas don't have seeds, but they are about to go extinct from a fungal disease because they are so refined.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118699</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243439820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was incredibly disappointed with how Gattaca handled its genetic engineering premise.<br> <br>
In essence, Gattaca passes up the chance to face a really interesting question: "What would happen in a world where science has ensured that all men are <i>very much not</i> created equal?" and, instead, passes off a much, much flatter sci-fi racism allegory.<br> <br>

Supposedly, the protagonist suffers from a number of serious genetic defects, his heart condition being the worst. His brother, and the fellow whose identity he uses, do not. This is treated as simple fact within the context of the movie, the same way the space technology is. And yet, it has virtually no effect on the characters. The protagonist completes, without undue effort, highly rigorous physical and mental training(with a single heart palpitation to add dramatic tension). His only risk is being discovered and unjustly victimized by society; simply being let down by his body isn't an issue. By contrast, the fellow he is impersonating is impulsive, depressive, and suicidal(all traits with genetic components, but he has them and the protagonist doesn't, despite being engineered). The protagonist's brother is similarly unaffected by his supposedly superior genes.<br> <br>
The movie constantly downplays, in practice, the effect of genes on phenotype(and completely ignores the potential for psychology to be affected by genetics, in favor of a fuzzy "triumph of the human spirit" subplot) while making it a major plot point. It ends up simply being the story of "perfectly good guy, oppressed just because of who he is, shows what he can do through sheer pluck" rather than the much more interesting(but considerably darker and less comfortable) story of "adequate guy, whose inescapable limitations doom him to a life of frustration and inferiority" or, even, "Bold, self-absorbed, narcissist bluffs his way onto a mission where a number of other are depending on him to do what he knows he won't be able to do".</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was incredibly disappointed with how Gattaca handled its genetic engineering premise .
In essence , Gattaca passes up the chance to face a really interesting question : " What would happen in a world where science has ensured that all men are very much not created equal ?
" and , instead , passes off a much , much flatter sci-fi racism allegory .
Supposedly , the protagonist suffers from a number of serious genetic defects , his heart condition being the worst .
His brother , and the fellow whose identity he uses , do not .
This is treated as simple fact within the context of the movie , the same way the space technology is .
And yet , it has virtually no effect on the characters .
The protagonist completes , without undue effort , highly rigorous physical and mental training ( with a single heart palpitation to add dramatic tension ) .
His only risk is being discovered and unjustly victimized by society ; simply being let down by his body is n't an issue .
By contrast , the fellow he is impersonating is impulsive , depressive , and suicidal ( all traits with genetic components , but he has them and the protagonist does n't , despite being engineered ) .
The protagonist 's brother is similarly unaffected by his supposedly superior genes .
The movie constantly downplays , in practice , the effect of genes on phenotype ( and completely ignores the potential for psychology to be affected by genetics , in favor of a fuzzy " triumph of the human spirit " subplot ) while making it a major plot point .
It ends up simply being the story of " perfectly good guy , oppressed just because of who he is , shows what he can do through sheer pluck " rather than the much more interesting ( but considerably darker and less comfortable ) story of " adequate guy , whose inescapable limitations doom him to a life of frustration and inferiority " or , even , " Bold , self-absorbed , narcissist bluffs his way onto a mission where a number of other are depending on him to do what he knows he wo n't be able to do " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was incredibly disappointed with how Gattaca handled its genetic engineering premise.
In essence, Gattaca passes up the chance to face a really interesting question: "What would happen in a world where science has ensured that all men are very much not created equal?
" and, instead, passes off a much, much flatter sci-fi racism allegory.
Supposedly, the protagonist suffers from a number of serious genetic defects, his heart condition being the worst.
His brother, and the fellow whose identity he uses, do not.
This is treated as simple fact within the context of the movie, the same way the space technology is.
And yet, it has virtually no effect on the characters.
The protagonist completes, without undue effort, highly rigorous physical and mental training(with a single heart palpitation to add dramatic tension).
His only risk is being discovered and unjustly victimized by society; simply being let down by his body isn't an issue.
By contrast, the fellow he is impersonating is impulsive, depressive, and suicidal(all traits with genetic components, but he has them and the protagonist doesn't, despite being engineered).
The protagonist's brother is similarly unaffected by his supposedly superior genes.
The movie constantly downplays, in practice, the effect of genes on phenotype(and completely ignores the potential for psychology to be affected by genetics, in favor of a fuzzy "triumph of the human spirit" subplot) while making it a major plot point.
It ends up simply being the story of "perfectly good guy, oppressed just because of who he is, shows what he can do through sheer pluck" rather than the much more interesting(but considerably darker and less comfortable) story of "adequate guy, whose inescapable limitations doom him to a life of frustration and inferiority" or, even, "Bold, self-absorbed, narcissist bluffs his way onto a mission where a number of other are depending on him to do what he knows he won't be able to do".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28130121</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1243504980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Supposedly, the protagonist suffers from a number of serious genetic defects, his heart condition being the worst.</i> </p><p>Actually, if you listen carefully, you'll note that he is only diagnosed as having a <i>high probability</i> of various genetic disorders, and based merely on that <i>chance</i> he was ostracized from "valid" society.  Since he outlives his predicted life span, it's safe to say he dodged at least some of those bullets, though he definitely has poor vision and a heart that is significantly weaker than the person he is imitating, though not so weak that it kills him.</p><p> <i>The protagonist completes, without undue effort, highly rigorous physical and mental training</i> </p><p>What you call 'without undue effort' I call 'with non-stop single-minded determination and dedication'.</p><p> <i>(with a single heart palpitation to add dramatic tension)</i> </p><p>How many heart palpitations have to occur on-screen for you to get the idea that running for twenty minutes straight was anything but easy for him?</p><p> <i>By contrast, the fellow he is impersonating is impulsive, depressive, and suicidal(all traits with genetic components, but he has them and the protagonist doesn't, despite being engineered).</i> </p><p>I'm pretty sure 'propensity for depression' wasn't listed as one of his genetic failings so I don't know why it bothers you that he didn't have it.  And while yes there's a genetic <i>component</i>, unless you intend to take an extremely polarized (and I'd say indefensible) stance on the nature-vs-nurture debate on human psychology, why is it so implausible that the donor develops depression?  You think you can eliminate depression and suicide with genetic selection?</p><p> <i>The protagonist's brother is similarly unaffected by his supposedly superior genes.</i> </p><p>Not sure what you mean here...  He repeatedly kicks his brother's ass in swimming.  The two times he lost, both were due to self-doubt caused by <i>not</i> kicking his brother's ass as handily as his genes said he should.  I guess you're thinking the self-doubt gene should have been eliminated?</p><p> <i>The movie constantly downplays, in practice, the effect of genes on phenotype(and completely ignores the potential for psychology to be affected by genetics, in favor of a fuzzy "triumph of the human spirit" subplot) while making it a major plot point.</i> </p><p>It doesn't ignore it, it just doesn't consider it to be determinate as you do.</p><p>Part of the "human spirit" theme which pervades the movie is that a person's spirit/will/consciousness/whatever can allow a person to exceed, or fail to meet, the expectations put forth by their genetics.</p><p>The whole <i>reason</i> that the donor/roommate became depressed and suicidal was because he did not achieve what his genes said he should.  His genes said he should be the best while his silver medal said that in practice he wasn't.  I can see having that fundamental assumption of superiority knocked out from under him as being an impetus for depression.</p><p>It's kinda funny to me how the movie presents a society who assumes genetics are 100\% determinant of a person's potential, is repeatedly shown to be wrong, and your issue with the movie is that they are shown to be wrong instead of right.   Even though the scientists in the movie accurately attribute probabilistic risk <i>factors</i> to certain genes, not necessarily guarantees.</p><p> <i>rather than the much more interesting(but considerably darker and less comfortable) story of "adequate guy, whose inescapable limitations doom him to a life of frustration and inferiority"</i> </p><p>You mean the story of every other "invalid" in the movie?  Yeah, I'm not seeing what's so interesting about "guy's genes say he won't succeed, turn out to be right".  I'm sure you could craft a good story around one of them, but the premise by itself isn't interesting.  Anyway, they decided to focus on somebody who was exceptional.  I don't see what the big crime is here.</p><p> <i>"Bold, self-absorbed, narcissist bluffs his way onto a mission whe</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Supposedly , the protagonist suffers from a number of serious genetic defects , his heart condition being the worst .
Actually , if you listen carefully , you 'll note that he is only diagnosed as having a high probability of various genetic disorders , and based merely on that chance he was ostracized from " valid " society .
Since he outlives his predicted life span , it 's safe to say he dodged at least some of those bullets , though he definitely has poor vision and a heart that is significantly weaker than the person he is imitating , though not so weak that it kills him .
The protagonist completes , without undue effort , highly rigorous physical and mental training What you call 'without undue effort ' I call 'with non-stop single-minded determination and dedication' .
( with a single heart palpitation to add dramatic tension ) How many heart palpitations have to occur on-screen for you to get the idea that running for twenty minutes straight was anything but easy for him ?
By contrast , the fellow he is impersonating is impulsive , depressive , and suicidal ( all traits with genetic components , but he has them and the protagonist does n't , despite being engineered ) .
I 'm pretty sure 'propensity for depression ' was n't listed as one of his genetic failings so I do n't know why it bothers you that he did n't have it .
And while yes there 's a genetic component , unless you intend to take an extremely polarized ( and I 'd say indefensible ) stance on the nature-vs-nurture debate on human psychology , why is it so implausible that the donor develops depression ?
You think you can eliminate depression and suicide with genetic selection ?
The protagonist 's brother is similarly unaffected by his supposedly superior genes .
Not sure what you mean here... He repeatedly kicks his brother 's ass in swimming .
The two times he lost , both were due to self-doubt caused by not kicking his brother 's ass as handily as his genes said he should .
I guess you 're thinking the self-doubt gene should have been eliminated ?
The movie constantly downplays , in practice , the effect of genes on phenotype ( and completely ignores the potential for psychology to be affected by genetics , in favor of a fuzzy " triumph of the human spirit " subplot ) while making it a major plot point .
It does n't ignore it , it just does n't consider it to be determinate as you do.Part of the " human spirit " theme which pervades the movie is that a person 's spirit/will/consciousness/whatever can allow a person to exceed , or fail to meet , the expectations put forth by their genetics.The whole reason that the donor/roommate became depressed and suicidal was because he did not achieve what his genes said he should .
His genes said he should be the best while his silver medal said that in practice he was n't .
I can see having that fundamental assumption of superiority knocked out from under him as being an impetus for depression.It 's kinda funny to me how the movie presents a society who assumes genetics are 100 \ % determinant of a person 's potential , is repeatedly shown to be wrong , and your issue with the movie is that they are shown to be wrong instead of right .
Even though the scientists in the movie accurately attribute probabilistic risk factors to certain genes , not necessarily guarantees .
rather than the much more interesting ( but considerably darker and less comfortable ) story of " adequate guy , whose inescapable limitations doom him to a life of frustration and inferiority " You mean the story of every other " invalid " in the movie ?
Yeah , I 'm not seeing what 's so interesting about " guy 's genes say he wo n't succeed , turn out to be right " .
I 'm sure you could craft a good story around one of them , but the premise by itself is n't interesting .
Anyway , they decided to focus on somebody who was exceptional .
I do n't see what the big crime is here .
" Bold , self-absorbed , narcissist bluffs his way onto a mission whe</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Supposedly, the protagonist suffers from a number of serious genetic defects, his heart condition being the worst.
Actually, if you listen carefully, you'll note that he is only diagnosed as having a high probability of various genetic disorders, and based merely on that chance he was ostracized from "valid" society.
Since he outlives his predicted life span, it's safe to say he dodged at least some of those bullets, though he definitely has poor vision and a heart that is significantly weaker than the person he is imitating, though not so weak that it kills him.
The protagonist completes, without undue effort, highly rigorous physical and mental training What you call 'without undue effort' I call 'with non-stop single-minded determination and dedication'.
(with a single heart palpitation to add dramatic tension) How many heart palpitations have to occur on-screen for you to get the idea that running for twenty minutes straight was anything but easy for him?
By contrast, the fellow he is impersonating is impulsive, depressive, and suicidal(all traits with genetic components, but he has them and the protagonist doesn't, despite being engineered).
I'm pretty sure 'propensity for depression' wasn't listed as one of his genetic failings so I don't know why it bothers you that he didn't have it.
And while yes there's a genetic component, unless you intend to take an extremely polarized (and I'd say indefensible) stance on the nature-vs-nurture debate on human psychology, why is it so implausible that the donor develops depression?
You think you can eliminate depression and suicide with genetic selection?
The protagonist's brother is similarly unaffected by his supposedly superior genes.
Not sure what you mean here...  He repeatedly kicks his brother's ass in swimming.
The two times he lost, both were due to self-doubt caused by not kicking his brother's ass as handily as his genes said he should.
I guess you're thinking the self-doubt gene should have been eliminated?
The movie constantly downplays, in practice, the effect of genes on phenotype(and completely ignores the potential for psychology to be affected by genetics, in favor of a fuzzy "triumph of the human spirit" subplot) while making it a major plot point.
It doesn't ignore it, it just doesn't consider it to be determinate as you do.Part of the "human spirit" theme which pervades the movie is that a person's spirit/will/consciousness/whatever can allow a person to exceed, or fail to meet, the expectations put forth by their genetics.The whole reason that the donor/roommate became depressed and suicidal was because he did not achieve what his genes said he should.
His genes said he should be the best while his silver medal said that in practice he wasn't.
I can see having that fundamental assumption of superiority knocked out from under him as being an impetus for depression.It's kinda funny to me how the movie presents a society who assumes genetics are 100\% determinant of a person's potential, is repeatedly shown to be wrong, and your issue with the movie is that they are shown to be wrong instead of right.
Even though the scientists in the movie accurately attribute probabilistic risk factors to certain genes, not necessarily guarantees.
rather than the much more interesting(but considerably darker and less comfortable) story of "adequate guy, whose inescapable limitations doom him to a life of frustration and inferiority" You mean the story of every other "invalid" in the movie?
Yeah, I'm not seeing what's so interesting about "guy's genes say he won't succeed, turn out to be right".
I'm sure you could craft a good story around one of them, but the premise by itself isn't interesting.
Anyway, they decided to focus on somebody who was exceptional.
I don't see what the big crime is here.
"Bold, self-absorbed, narcissist bluffs his way onto a mission whe</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117867</id>
	<title>Fluorescent monkeys? Bah</title>
	<author>MillionthMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1243432980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want phosphorescent monkeys, dammit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want phosphorescent monkeys , dammit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want phosphorescent monkeys, dammit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28123863</id>
	<title>Gives a new meaning to the Movie</title>
	<author>Prince Vegeta SSJ4</author>
	<datestamp>1243526520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/monkey\_shines/" title="rottentomatoes.com" rel="nofollow">Monkey Shines</a> [rottentomatoes.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Monkey Shines [ rottentomatoes.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Monkey Shines [rottentomatoes.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118039</id>
	<title>oblig.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243434240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Take your shining paws off me, you damn dazzling ape!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take your shining paws off me , you damn dazzling ape !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take your shining paws off me, you damn dazzling ape!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118015</id>
	<title>Sigh....</title>
	<author>Akir</author>
	<datestamp>1243434000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Slippery Slope" is an idea pushed by the ultra-conservative republicans in an attempt to prevent any kind of societal progress. A means to spread FUD, it is the absolute lowest of all attacks that can be given, as it needs no facts, proof, or any kind of truth to be taken for the claim to be considered truthful and factual. For a better example, see the false and flimsy arguments against gay marriage. <br> <br>

Also, where in hell did that last quote come from? It makes no sense in this context, and it doesn't appear in any of the links.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Slippery Slope " is an idea pushed by the ultra-conservative republicans in an attempt to prevent any kind of societal progress .
A means to spread FUD , it is the absolute lowest of all attacks that can be given , as it needs no facts , proof , or any kind of truth to be taken for the claim to be considered truthful and factual .
For a better example , see the false and flimsy arguments against gay marriage .
Also , where in hell did that last quote come from ?
It makes no sense in this context , and it does n't appear in any of the links .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Slippery Slope" is an idea pushed by the ultra-conservative republicans in an attempt to prevent any kind of societal progress.
A means to spread FUD, it is the absolute lowest of all attacks that can be given, as it needs no facts, proof, or any kind of truth to be taken for the claim to be considered truthful and factual.
For a better example, see the false and flimsy arguments against gay marriage.
Also, where in hell did that last quote come from?
It makes no sense in this context, and it doesn't appear in any of the links.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118823</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243441140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Here's a hint: The reason why the world of Gattaca is dystopic isn't because of genetic engineering.</i></p><p>It isn't?  I'm not trolling.  It sure seems like if everyone is born perfect everyone would be dehumanized.  We'd all be largely the same.  I can't imagine what life would be like for non-engineered people.</p><p>I mean, I love the idea of removing genetic diseases, but it sure does seem like a slippery slope to something way more dangerous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a hint : The reason why the world of Gattaca is dystopic is n't because of genetic engineering.It is n't ?
I 'm not trolling .
It sure seems like if everyone is born perfect everyone would be dehumanized .
We 'd all be largely the same .
I ca n't imagine what life would be like for non-engineered people.I mean , I love the idea of removing genetic diseases , but it sure does seem like a slippery slope to something way more dangerous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a hint: The reason why the world of Gattaca is dystopic isn't because of genetic engineering.It isn't?
I'm not trolling.
It sure seems like if everyone is born perfect everyone would be dehumanized.
We'd all be largely the same.
I can't imagine what life would be like for non-engineered people.I mean, I love the idea of removing genetic diseases, but it sure does seem like a slippery slope to something way more dangerous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119717</id>
	<title>Re:Oblig...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243450500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whoo Hoo! Rave Monkey overlords!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whoo Hoo !
Rave Monkey overlords !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whoo Hoo!
Rave Monkey overlords!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119513</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>JuzzFunky</author>
	<datestamp>1243448580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Modifying genetic code to remove known defects that will do nothing but cause a lifetime of suffering is hardly dehumanizing.  If anything, having the ability to prevent this kind of suffering and choosing not to would be inhumane. </p><p> <i>Sure it sucks that you have a crippling disability and no quality of life and will probably die young and in pain, but at least you're unique.</i> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Modifying genetic code to remove known defects that will do nothing but cause a lifetime of suffering is hardly dehumanizing .
If anything , having the ability to prevent this kind of suffering and choosing not to would be inhumane .
Sure it sucks that you have a crippling disability and no quality of life and will probably die young and in pain , but at least you 're unique .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Modifying genetic code to remove known defects that will do nothing but cause a lifetime of suffering is hardly dehumanizing.
If anything, having the ability to prevent this kind of suffering and choosing not to would be inhumane.
Sure it sucks that you have a crippling disability and no quality of life and will probably die young and in pain, but at least you're unique. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118181</id>
	<title>Pets that already glow under UV light  ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243435560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>are called scorpions, see: <a href="http://johnbokma.com/mexit/2008/03/01/mating-scorpions-from-molcaxac-puebla.html" title="johnbokma.com" rel="nofollow">Mating scorpions from Molcaxac, Puebla</a> [johnbokma.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>are called scorpions , see : Mating scorpions from Molcaxac , Puebla [ johnbokma.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are called scorpions, see: Mating scorpions from Molcaxac, Puebla [johnbokma.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118385</id>
	<title>Re:Just a matter of time</title>
	<author>alienunknown</author>
	<datestamp>1243437360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, how long do you think it'll be before decedents of these 'somehow' hit the exotic pet trade.</p></div><p>
I'm sure it will only be a matter of weeks before vendors start selling glowing monkeys to drug-fucked people at raves/clubs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , how long do you think it 'll be before decedents of these 'somehow ' hit the exotic pet trade .
I 'm sure it will only be a matter of weeks before vendors start selling glowing monkeys to drug-fucked people at raves/clubs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, how long do you think it'll be before decedents of these 'somehow' hit the exotic pet trade.
I'm sure it will only be a matter of weeks before vendors start selling glowing monkeys to drug-fucked people at raves/clubs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117875</id>
	<title>Glowing is cool, but the novelty is elsewhere</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243433100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Biologists have been making this glow for a long time:
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green\_fluorescent\_protein" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green\_fluorescent\_protein</a> [wikipedia.org]

But the novelty is that now you can make green offspring with no extra effort!

For those with journal access to nature, the source:
<a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/nature08090.html" title="nature.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/nature08090.html</a> [nature.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Biologists have been making this glow for a long time : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green \ _fluorescent \ _protein [ wikipedia.org ] But the novelty is that now you can make green offspring with no extra effort !
For those with journal access to nature , the source : http : //www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/nature08090.html [ nature.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Biologists have been making this glow for a long time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green\_fluorescent\_protein [wikipedia.org]

But the novelty is that now you can make green offspring with no extra effort!
For those with journal access to nature, the source:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/nature08090.html [nature.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118483</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>4D6963</author>
	<datestamp>1243438140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IIT : Sci-fi fans who take what they read a bit too seriously.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IIT : Sci-fi fans who take what they read a bit too seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IIT : Sci-fi fans who take what they read a bit too seriously.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243439820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is what worries me - How many things in nature have been IMPROVED through human involvement?</p><p>Go on, count them...I'll wait.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what worries me - How many things in nature have been IMPROVED through human involvement ? Go on , count them...I 'll wait .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what worries me - How many things in nature have been IMPROVED through human involvement?Go on, count them...I'll wait.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119081</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Jeremi</author>
	<datestamp>1243444140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>This is what worries me - How many things in nature have been IMPROVED through human involvement?</i></p><p>Well, the food is certainly better now.... the meat is better cooked than raw, and the fruits and vegetables have been bred for centuries and now they're delicious.  You should have seen the semi-edible crap that people subsisted on a few millenia ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what worries me - How many things in nature have been IMPROVED through human involvement ? Well , the food is certainly better now.... the meat is better cooked than raw , and the fruits and vegetables have been bred for centuries and now they 're delicious .
You should have seen the semi-edible crap that people subsisted on a few millenia ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what worries me - How many things in nature have been IMPROVED through human involvement?Well, the food is certainly better now.... the meat is better cooked than raw, and the fruits and vegetables have been bred for centuries and now they're delicious.
You should have seen the semi-edible crap that people subsisted on a few millenia ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28122035</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Ginger Unicorn</author>
	<datestamp>1243517400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What do you mean improved? Improved from the perspective of who or what, and by what metric? What do you mean by "in nature"? Everything is "in nature".</htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you mean improved ?
Improved from the perspective of who or what , and by what metric ?
What do you mean by " in nature " ?
Everything is " in nature " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you mean improved?
Improved from the perspective of who or what, and by what metric?
What do you mean by "in nature"?
Everything is "in nature".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28122871</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Anivair</author>
	<datestamp>1243521840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed.  I'm not sure why these chicken little types always seem to think that scientists need some sort of public approval to do research, but I think they must never have read a history book.  Where did the inane idea that the public gets a say some from?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
I 'm not sure why these chicken little types always seem to think that scientists need some sort of public approval to do research , but I think they must never have read a history book .
Where did the inane idea that the public gets a say some from ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
I'm not sure why these chicken little types always seem to think that scientists need some sort of public approval to do research, but I think they must never have read a history book.
Where did the inane idea that the public gets a say some from?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28124341</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243528320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You missed the point.  They didn't just eliminate disease, they removed genes responsible for risk-taking behavior, as those were considered to give your child the best advantage.  That's why the main character was always able to exceed his brother in every turn, he took risks and his brother was too chicken.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You missed the point .
They did n't just eliminate disease , they removed genes responsible for risk-taking behavior , as those were considered to give your child the best advantage .
That 's why the main character was always able to exceed his brother in every turn , he took risks and his brother was too chicken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You missed the point.
They didn't just eliminate disease, they removed genes responsible for risk-taking behavior, as those were considered to give your child the best advantage.
That's why the main character was always able to exceed his brother in every turn, he took risks and his brother was too chicken.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118873</id>
	<title>Re:Fluorescent monkeys? Bah</title>
	<author>davidsyes</author>
	<datestamp>1243441620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FIGHTING with one of these lean, mean green machines would definitely show you to be very unenlightened...</p><p>But, if you don't believe, then read this:</p><p><a href="http://www.wikihow.com/Prevent-or-Survive-a-Monkey-Attack" title="wikihow.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.wikihow.com/Prevent-or-Survive-a-Monkey-Attack</a> [wikihow.com]</p><p>Now, if you don't heed, you will bleed, and kiss behind your behind for that last view of monkeyshine...</p><p>When all else fails, make love, not war. Get down with the monkey business... and do the funky monkey..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FIGHTING with one of these lean , mean green machines would definitely show you to be very unenlightened...But , if you do n't believe , then read this : http : //www.wikihow.com/Prevent-or-Survive-a-Monkey-Attack [ wikihow.com ] Now , if you do n't heed , you will bleed , and kiss behind your behind for that last view of monkeyshine...When all else fails , make love , not war .
Get down with the monkey business... and do the funky monkey. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FIGHTING with one of these lean, mean green machines would definitely show you to be very unenlightened...But, if you don't believe, then read this:http://www.wikihow.com/Prevent-or-Survive-a-Monkey-Attack [wikihow.com]Now, if you don't heed, you will bleed, and kiss behind your behind for that last view of monkeyshine...When all else fails, make love, not war.
Get down with the monkey business... and do the funky monkey..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28135289</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering!</title>
	<author>defireman</author>
	<datestamp>1243537200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some people might think it's fine to be ugly but 'unique'. But genetic prescreening and treatment would do a lot of good in curing a lot of social problems. Removing predisposition to acne for one would eliminate a lot of social prejudice, and who says such treatment cannot be handed out to the people for free?

Instead we're talking about suppressing entire technologies simply because 'the poor cannot afford it', and that 'it will cause discrimination'. These things are social and economic problems that can be solved given enough effort. But the technology has to be there first.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some people might think it 's fine to be ugly but 'unique' .
But genetic prescreening and treatment would do a lot of good in curing a lot of social problems .
Removing predisposition to acne for one would eliminate a lot of social prejudice , and who says such treatment can not be handed out to the people for free ?
Instead we 're talking about suppressing entire technologies simply because 'the poor can not afford it ' , and that 'it will cause discrimination' .
These things are social and economic problems that can be solved given enough effort .
But the technology has to be there first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some people might think it's fine to be ugly but 'unique'.
But genetic prescreening and treatment would do a lot of good in curing a lot of social problems.
Removing predisposition to acne for one would eliminate a lot of social prejudice, and who says such treatment cannot be handed out to the people for free?
Instead we're talking about suppressing entire technologies simply because 'the poor cannot afford it', and that 'it will cause discrimination'.
These things are social and economic problems that can be solved given enough effort.
But the technology has to be there first.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121757</id>
	<title>Re:Glowing is cool, but the novelty is elsewhere</title>
	<author>damian cosmas</author>
	<datestamp>1243515900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I posted these when the article was on the firehose for the benefit of the non-technical audience, but I guess they don't carry over when the story gets promoted:</p><p>Summary:<br><a href="http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090527/full/459492a.html" title="nature.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090527/full/459492a.html</a> [nature.com]</p><p>Editorial:<br><a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/459483a.html" title="nature.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/459483a.html</a> [nature.com]</p><p>Summary for Scientists:<br><a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/459515a.html" title="nature.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/459515a.html</a> [nature.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I posted these when the article was on the firehose for the benefit of the non-technical audience , but I guess they do n't carry over when the story gets promoted : Summary : http : //www.nature.com/news/2009/090527/full/459492a.html [ nature.com ] Editorial : http : //www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/459483a.html [ nature.com ] Summary for Scientists : http : //www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/459515a.html [ nature.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I posted these when the article was on the firehose for the benefit of the non-technical audience, but I guess they don't carry over when the story gets promoted:Summary:http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090527/full/459492a.html [nature.com]Editorial:http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/459483a.html [nature.com]Summary for Scientists:http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7246/full/459515a.html [nature.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117875</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28129847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118483
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118385
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28124341
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118629
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117875
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118831
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118443
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28123863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28120369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118107
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28120321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28122035
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118443
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28120081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28124877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28130121
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28136023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118043
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28124209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118015
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28123865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28135289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28122871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117957
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28136789
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119717
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_27_2219221_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118443
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118379
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117853
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28120081
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118899
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28123863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118621
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121029
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118105
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118107
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118557
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28120369
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118205
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118629
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118385
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118309
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118553
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118039
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117875
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121757
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118115
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117901
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118175
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118665
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28135289
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118483
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119455
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119513
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28123865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118697
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119469
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121573
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28121153
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28136023
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28120321
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28129847
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119081
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28122035
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118823
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28122871
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118699
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28124877
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28130121
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28124341
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118015
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28124209
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117867
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28136789
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118321
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118367
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117921
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117923
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28117957
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118043
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_27_2219221.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118443
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28118831
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_27_2219221.28119001
</commentlist>
</conversation>
