Are you sure you really worked at a "university"? Was it University of Phoenix Online? I'd expect something in line with "A method and process to extrude titanium oxide to a nanoscale thread for improved semiconductivity." I'm not even in materials science field but I could come up with a more "university-caliber" patent application than those you listed.

Reason why they use internet language is to confuse those who do.not belong to the group they feel comfortable with, such ad parents or adults like you. Being understood is not so much of their concern.

Baumann, 2008, "Exploring the role of cancer stem cells in radioresistance", Nature Review Cancer. Thanks for asking. If you need the actual article, I will obtain it for your pastime reading. It's a fun read.

It's good to see that you've done research on this. First off, your description of nuclear transfer is a gross misrepresentation of the actually process if not misunderstanding. Let me lay out a historical perspective. In 2005, a Korean researcher claimed that he was able to reliably perform nuclear transfer and was heralded as the biggest breakthrough in ESC research of 21st century. And you probably know that it was shown to be a scientific fraud. That was 5 years ago, and still the whole field hasn't been able to figure out a way to do this. As I said taking a nucleus out of a single ESC and replace it with another is an extremely difficult process that is fundamentally challenging. Even if this will one day be possible, another challenge is when it's transplanted in human body, it will form teratoma. Teratoma is the fundamental requirement of ESC because that's what defines ESC and what confers its ability to regenerate. So if you want to use ESCs you need to differentiate it down a certain pathway so you know for sure that the ESC cannot form teratoma but still capable enough to regenerate the tissue of interest. This is again an extremely difficult process. So ESC in their native form has no value except for research. So why is then adult stem cell more promising? There is a spectrum of stem-cell-likeness. When you are a blastocyst you have unlimited potential of multiplication. When you are old you are not so much so. What IPS researchers have found is that the machineries that make cells stem cells are still there and can be turned on. Using this gives you huge advantages. These cells will never form teratoma. These cells will be immunocompatible as they are autologous. As far as regenerative capacity is concerned there's already clinical studies that have shown that adult stem cells can indeed regenerate certain tissues. For example, HSC have been used for a while to regenerate bone marrow after chemo for leukemia. MSCs have been used to regenerate other types of tissues. There are varying degress of success, but with IPS, this can only go up.

There is a good reason to avoid embryonic stem cell altogether. The biggest reason is because we have no good ways to control its potential to form teratoma, which is basically cancerous mass of tissues of all types. That's what's happening at those rogue Russian stem cell clinics. Although it is true that ESCs have the biggest potential to regenerate, it's also most potent cancer forming cells. Some theorize that cancer is actually rogue stem cells. Another practical reason why ESCs could be avoided is because adult stem cells have been shown to be able to transform to embryonic counterparts. This is a complex topic of its own. If you are interested look up IPS = induced pluripotent stem cell.

One thing you are grossly misunderstanding if where you describe how ESC are tailored for individuals by mixing with "slurry" of one's DNAs. Usually, "customization" of ESC with someone's DNA entails very risky process of nuclear transfer. In essence, you suck out the native nucleus and replace it your own, so ESC becomes your own cell line to transplant to whatever tissue you need to regenerate. Being able to achieve nuclear transfer with acceptable reliability alone would be a Nobel prize worthy accomplishment. Anyway, there is a good reason to avoid embryonic stem cell altogether. The biggest reason is because we have no good ways to control its potential to form teratoma, which is basically cancerous mass of tissues of all types. That's what's happening at those rogue Russian stem cell clinics. Although it is true that ESCs have the biggest potential to regenerate, it's also most potent cancer forming cells. Some theorize that cancer is actually rogue stem cells. Another practical reason why ESCs could be avoided is because adult stem cells have been shown to be able to transform to embryonic counterparts. This is a complex topic of its own. If you are interested look up IPS = induced pluripotent stem cell.

Yeah, Ditto million times. This seems to be the best way to solve this problem. Just don't buy from them!!

I'm not exactly sure your first point was necessary to convey your opinion. Every nation has its national pride, with America being most proud of all, which manifests well in their belief that they can dictate what other nations do within their sovereignty. You seem to consider two Koreas as just products of the fabric of good and evil, which to Americans, translate to capitalism and communism. Although it is difficult to predict what would have happened if allies with then Soviet Union did not intervene altogether, I'd say there would have been at least a small possibility that Korea wouldn't have been asunder like it is now. So please keep your belittling and hate-speeching to yourself.

There are small fractions of people who believe whatever they want to just like in America people believe anything thy want to from anarchism to socialism. They are those who are dissatisfied with the status quo in SKorea or those who professionally organize protests. Nothing to pay attention to.

According to the defectors from NKorea, NKoreans are not brainwashed like as we believe they would be. They know too well what it's like to live outside NKorea.

It has nothing to do with Culture. SKorea is not going to destroy the culture of NKorea. What's at stake is whether democracy will stay in Korea or Fascist totalitarianism. Culture has nothing to do with it.

Being politically savvy is one thing and standing up for yourself is another. Eventually what really matters is whether you stood up for yourself not whether you were able to please everyone while you are at it. If you try to please everyone as you stand up for yourself, you'd better not do it at all to begin with. How do you stand up against senseless meme? How do you defend yourself from foreign invasion? By going on a war.

That's basically what they mean by reunification. Would you have Saddam Hussein continue to govern Iraq after US invasion? Same logic.

I'm not sure why your brother would think that way. General sentiment shared by most Koreans about reunification is that they don't need it. They have a pretty obscure idea of reunification, but they do not feel strongly that they need it right now. As far as who gets to be in control after reunification, most people agree that the NKorean regime will be thrown out and the communist party will be dissolved. I grew up in Korea and never in my life heard someone saying that Kim Jong Il should govern the reunited Korea except for those looney commies.

Why would Koreans care about what you think of them? If they find something offensive they have every right to retaliate to the authors of that offensive material, provided that they take responsibility for the legal repercussions. You are saying as if if someone makes fun of you you should just let it go so it doesn't become a bigger problem. I'd say that's a cowardice nothing more.