During the summers before 11th and 12th grades, I had to read numerous books and keep a reflective journal focused on my readings. Some of these journal entries are provided below.
Argument for Genetic Engineering [entry dated June 8, 1996]
Genetic engineering may be the best scientific discovery in the history of man. There is no limit to what scientists can do with this new-found technology. Genetic engineering can reduce deaths to humans, prevent extinction for animals, and lead to the building of better food to feed all of mankind.
The discovery of genes that can lead to the detection of cancer, heart disease, or other various ailments can mean nothing less than the eradication of these maladies. It would thus be possible for the human race to save millions of people from death annually. Just think about it. Remember your Uncle Bob, the only family member that you would admit you were related to? Only a mild heart attack. He'll live through it, right? But he didn't. Your Uncle Bob would still be around today if we would have had genetic engineering when he was born.
Remember the European bison? Probably not. It's not as famous as the dodo bird, but it's just as extinct as the dodo in the wild. However, there still may be a chance for the bison. There are a few left on reserves and in captivity. By simply taking the bison's DNA and cloning other bison with it, one species would be saved from extinction. The possibility of not having to worry about the extinction of any species is exhilarating.
Perhaps best of all, and certainly the least controversial, is the ability for scientists to make better food for those who are malnourished or starving. Imagine, a rice plant that, instead of thriving in extremely wet conditions, flourishes in the arid climate of a desert. Forty million Ethiopians would no longer starve, and the world would be a better place because of it.
As you can see, genetic engineering cannot possibly be held as anything other than righteous. The ability to make the world a better place cannot be held as a liability to science.
Argument against Genetic Engineering [entry dated June 9, 1996]
Genetic engineering may be the most disastrous scientific discovery in the history of man. There is no limit to what scientists can do with this new-found technology. Genetic engineering may bring about several things: a disastrous new disease, a deadly new animal, or, perhaps most frightening, a new, superior human race.
Things are going along smoothly in the GEL Laboratories, until a lab technician makes a tiny mistake. While trying to perfect a new virus that will help humans eradicate the common cold, the technician mistakenly puts a cytosine molecule in place of a guanine. Boom! Disaster strikes when she drops the test tube. A new, airborne disease that kills victims within hours is unleashed to begin its quest to make humans extinct.
Meanwhile, halfway across the world from GEL Laboratories is the Spanish National Laboratories, or El Fénix. The Spaniards are trying to perfect the gene sequence for the quagga, a close relative of the zebra. They have what they think is the complete gene sequence, but the only way to be sure is to grow a quagga from the DNA that they have sequenced. When the genetically engineered quagga is born, it has a rainbow-colored checkerboard design on its hair. But instead of the soft hair that quaggas usually have, this quagga has quills like a porcupine. As the first scientist to touch the quagga found out, the quills are also poisonous. After taking over the lab, the quagga was destroyed by a nuclear bomb implosion above the compound in what the Spanish claimed was the only way to save all of Europe.
In labs all around the world, there are thousands of scientists working on the Human Genome Project. That is the project that will make a complete map of human DNA. One bright scientist decides that he will make a human that will have everything just right with it. It will have no inherited diseases, it will never have cancer, it will have an IQ of over 200, and will be a blonde-haired, blue-eyed, muscular, tall, dark, and handsome male. You might be thinking that this scientist is Otto Hitler, Adolf's grandson or something. But that's not the case.
There are some serious questions that need to be addressed before genetic engineering should take place. But who will answer those questions? And who will select those who are to answer the questions? Nobody knows. And that is one reason that genetic engineering should not take place.
Movie vs. Book [entry dated June 22, 1996]
The basic premise for both the book and the movie is the same; namely, to convince the reader or viewer that the production of dinosaurs is not only possible, but also is plausible. Thus, one would think that a movie would have an inherent advantage offer a book in that the movie, with special effects, could bring forth an exact image of a giant Tyrannosaurus rex, and thus lead every viewer to the conclusion that it is possible for dinosaurs to exist, because, gosh darn it, I can see them! However, that was not the effect that the movie had on me.
I enjoyed the book version of Jurassic Park more because it explained everything in logical, sequential, steps. Even the plot items that were not necessarily in order were adequately foreshadowed, so that I knew what was happening. I didn't get the same feel from the movie. While the book flowed like a river nicely from action to explanation and back again, the movie was a jerky ride down a bumpy road. The movie relied too much upon action, and not enough upon explanation.
While I found the movie outrageous and farfetched, the book to me was 100% believable. The author did an excellent job in portraying all characters and situations as they would have occurred in real life, and I think that is why I enjoyed the book immensely and the movie not at all.