From an design perspective, there is no compelling reason to think that CRISPR gene editing will constitute an enhancement tool for building superior humans.
Proponents of intelligent design would agree that biology is imperfect and biomedicine should be encouraged to cure diseases and fix problems.
I won’t recap the splendid work Emily Reeves has already done here in dissecting the TEDx talk from a scientific angle.
The brains of two babies who were germ-line gene edited using the CRISPR process — meaning the engineered genetic changes will flow down the generations.
Peter Clarke claims that I was “clearly fearmongering,” but then admits, “this depiction is fairly accurate.” Okay, then.