[leucetios]

Putting aside the question of whether the Nazi human experiments were scientifically valid for a moment do you think it is "right" or "acceptable" to use/quote/cite the results of the Nazi expiriments in ongoing scientific research?

[Sassy]

Putting aside the question of whether the Nazi human experiments were scientifically valid for a moment do you think it is "right" or "acceptable" to use/quote/cite the results of the Nazi expiriments in ongoing scientific research?

And right or acceptable to usequotecite the results of the Nazi expiriments in ongoing scientific research is Putting aside the question of whether the Nazi human experiments were scientifically valid for a moment do you think it.

[BIRD33]

no.

[leucetios]

no.

Why?

I'm actually torn. For example, discarding what they did with hypothermia would put us back quite a bit in hypothermia treatments. It was horrible and should never have happened, but it seems like ignoring informaiton that could save lives today because of it is naive.

[BIRD33]

I see both sides but it just seems wrong to base scientific findings on evil research.If there was a way to duplicate the results in a non evil way I think that should be done so there is something else to reference that didnt involve torture.Probably not possible in every case so I guess you can't throw it out completly but all efforts should be made so we don't need to refer to nazi research.

[ntype]

I would prolly go for a no, not because they were nazis and evil and shit but mainly because thoses researches were made with a clear goal in mind, they didn't made research with the mind open. They were attempting to prove something and that something they were already "sure" to be aware of it...so...

and moreover using 50 years old experiments is a little bit..erm outdated you can't really compare the modus operandi using thoses results in an actual research work may not be a good idea because the methods differs too much. At best you'll prove a relation of casuality.

[Paddy]

Didn't happen.

[leucetios]

I would prolly go for a no, not because they were nazis and evil and shit but mainly because thoses researches were made with a clear goal in mind, they didn't made research with the mind open. They were attempting to prove something and that something they were already "sure" to be aware of it...so...

and moreover using 50 years old experiments is a little bit..erm outdated you can't really compare the modus operandi using thoses results in an actual research work may not be a good idea because the methods differs too much. At best you'll prove a relation of casuality.

Yeah, that's why I said ignoring if they're scientifically valid, because they might not be. From what I read (which is admittedly little) they did seem to do some with an "open mind". That is, things like "how do we cure hypothermia" or wounds from mustard gas. They wanted to know how to help their own soldiers so they did horrible things to the prisoners.

And I get that saying anything good comes from it sounds like it endorses their behavior. I just don't think that's true, and if a scientist can use their "research", either as a starting point for more appropriate experiments/research or to help someone with hypothermia I don't think they should be villified.

Seems, from what I read, that some people think we should ignore all of the "research" the Nazis did, and I am just not sure I agree.

[what?]

I'm pretty sure banana quoted and linked some nazi research during the circumcision debate. nothing is sacred to the crazy bitch. hitler loved the foreskin, buncha blonde haired blue eyed dudes with grown over tips was his idea of the master race

[leucetios]

I'm pretty sure banana quoted and linked some nazi research during the circumcision debate. nothing is sacred to the crazy bitch. hitler loved the foreskin, buncha blonde haired blue eyed dudes with grown over tips was his idea of the master race

I could be wrong... but the Nazis' imprisoned Jews, who are already circumsized at birth. What possible experiments could they have done? :S

[what?]

I could be wrong... but the Nazis' imprisoned Jews, who are already circumsized at birth. What possible experiments could they have done? :S

they just cut off a little more. they called it "leucetiousizing"

[PaintItBlack]

Nazi weren't really bad people at all.

[Davey Moore]

Nazi weren't really bad people at all.

You're a clever mother fucker, huh?

[PaintItBlack]

You make minumum wage. Shocker. Back for more, eh ?

[ntype]

Yeah, that's why I said ignoring if they're scientifically valid, because they might not be. From what I read (which is admittedly little) they did seem to do some with an "open mind". That is, things like "how do we cure hypothermia" or wounds from mustard gas. They wanted to know how to help their own soldiers so they did horrible things to the prisoners.

And I get that saying anything good comes from it sounds like it endorses their behavior. I just don't think that's true, and if a scientist can use their "research", either as a starting point for more appropriate experiments/research or to help someone with hypothermia I don't think they should be villified.

Seems, from what I read, that some people think we should ignore all of the "research" the Nazis did, and I am just not sure I agree.

If you consider casual researches like "how to cure hypothermia" and stuff like that you could safely assume that nowadays we largerly have enough techniques to ensure that you could start with a more recent research. The same goes with any others researches they did.
The world was 50-70 years ago really different (ya count time for searchin') and techniques were really different, many things seems impressive because the Germans did really entered into the 20th century (compared to some countries who were still at the 19th century like polland) with some massive breakthrough...and you could be tempted to think that because of their "evil factor" they could as well have developped with a more liberal environment.

Technologies at this time were mostly chemical / engineering; they developped tools based on theoretical researches made during the beginnning of the 20th century (see relativity theory who brings you to things like A-bomb was formulated in 1905).

Nowadays you can see that we have jumped one category we are doing researches on nanometric scale (nano machines the size of a blood cell) and genetical (the manipulation of the living). You can see that many things are perceived as magic (aka like it goes against the will of the creator...they told the same to galileos when he told the fuckers that the earth was going AROUND the sun and not the contrary). It's because scientists are developping theories and techniques still that we have to fully understand (see stem cell controversy lately).

Considering that I would think that using any "nazi" research is just bogus like now if you start telling the world that you are going to perfectionnate the steam machine. people will tell ya "yeah ok good job" (maybe it's not a good reference because nuclear reactor are somewhat steam machines). Moreover if you consider some "researches" they do that still nobody officialy continued...well honestly this was the acts of a cruel barbarity (true 19th century doctors I tell ya) that should be done again because it was just the sickest thing you could do.

[Fatfuckfrank]

you stupid douchebag, please keep your posts limited to 10 words or less; idiot

[PaintItBlack]

Another douche with 10,000 useless posts. Holy christ, are all of you unemployed?

[BIRD33]

Another douche with 10,000 useless posts. Holy christ, are all of you unemployed?

Most blow your mind that some people work in offices with computers rather than thier dad's dry cleaners, huh?

[PaintItBlack]

Most blow your mind that some people work in offices with computers rather than thier dad's dry cleaners, huh?

Dad's dry cleaners...that's funny. How do you come up with this stuff ?

[Paddy]

Dad's dry cleaners...that's funny. How do you come up with this stuff ?

There's a book, "How to run Internet Dummies".