This House Would Clone Extinct Species

clone

The 23rd Ordinary Meeting of the Literary and Scientific Society took place on the 8th of May in the Senate Room.

Viorel Vlad, Owen Wright and Beth Malcolmson stood in proposition of cloning extinct species. Vlad stated that many aspects of biology being researched are linked and come together and we won’t know how much we can achieve until we do something. Owen continued by stating that by cloning extinct species we would rectify some of humanities mistakes. By increasing biodiversity we could be lead to medical cures. Malcolmson stated that the fact it is possible is reason enough to clone and that it is a process that will constantly improve. She said it was our responsibility to bring back species but that it should be a heavily regulated process.

Nic Brinza, Nick Millington and Derek Crosby spoke for opposition. Brinza admitted that in the past he got caught up in the awesome prospect of having pet dinosaur but that this just showed our susceptibility to only seeing the good but ignoring the dangers. Millington told the House that all cloning extinct species would do was to perfect the technique, but that our environment would gain nothing by bringing a species back. Crosby’s closing remarks focused on cloning angering God and that’s why he hit dinosaurs with a giant rock and some stuff about humans being a hardcore species covered in the hide of others.

The debate then went to the floor, a vote and the motion passed.

This House Believes Science Has Damned Us All.

science

 

The 9th Ordinary meeting of the 165th session of the Literary and Scientific society took place on the 28th of November in the Senate Room.

Matthew Allen, Dr. Stephen Goss and James McAlister proposed the motion. Allen opened the debate with a very interesting account of past philosophers and anthropologists (I think). He ended by reading a lovely poem to the House in its native Swedish. Yes. Goss brought up scientific theories that have been widely accepted but which have since been disproven and asked if it was worthwhile condemning ourselves for this. James McAlister compared our society’s way of life to that of the Amish who follow the bible for guidance and concluded that we will inevitably be damned by our advancements. However, he also said that we should just roll with it and be damned.

Fionnbharr Rodgers, Nick Millington and Dr David Timson opposed the debate. Fionn advised the House to ignore the extremists who create conflict as they are not a fair representation of either side. Mr Millington argued that heaven, the option other than being damned, has been raised in people’s minds but that in reality it may not be so wonderful. Dr Timson, our guest, said that science is good, that it has enhanced our lives in many ways; he argued that if science has damned us then God help the Vatican who sponsor science.

The debate then went to the floor.
Both sides summarised, the proposition in Swedish and we went to a vote. The motion was defeated.