Clone...

F

Frank Horrigan@BIS

Still Mildly Glowing
What are your thoughts about it? Which positive and negative branches could grow?

1. Bring back extincted beings such as the mammoth...
positive negative?

2. Clone humans, which would bring invincibility in views of others...
positive negative?
 
Frank Horrigan@BIS said:
What are your thoughts about it? Which positive and negative branches could grow?

2. Clone humans, which would bring invincibility in views of others...
positive negative?
Click to expand...

don't you mean immortallity?
 
All this about cloning humans i think is bull. We are born, we live and we die! Thats life and it shouldnt be changed.
Bringing back animals that have become extinct through natural causes is also a bad idea. They have become exstinct and new species have appeared, these things happen.
However, some species are becoming exstinct through the greed and stupidity of the human race, this isnt natural in anyway. Cloning could possible be used to clean up the mess that we are making.
But i generally think cloning is a bad idea. There is money to be made through cloning things, where there is money to be made, there will be the greed of humans to follow. This will lead to bad things such as the cloning of humans, legally or illegally!
 
i agree w/ wraith. additionally, we can also use cloning to add the number of the near-extinct animals. i'm against human cloning... except the cloning of donor organs.
 
The cloning of human organs could be very usefull if you use it to replace lost limbs and such. But it shouldn't be used for something like immortality(IMO)
 
spare parts

But to use the spareparts you would have to "grow" your clone to your approximate size, and that takes time, then you would have to kill him, and he is yourself (would that be consided suicide or fracticide).
Not needing a new bodypart, your clone could claim to be the strong one of the two and get you killed.
Not having had the life experience that you had, your clone would also not be quitre you.
ie. i broke 3 ribs when i was 20 now 10 years later they are weaker than the rests of my ribs and tend to get injured easier. My clone would not have that problem.
ie2 I had mono a long time ago, it damaged my liver, so now i'm hypoglycemic. getting a new liver from my clone would not only get rid of this "disease" but getting one that is not immune to all the child sickness i had would make me at risk of getting those. So i'd rather keep the old one and not getting sick.

Ok so someone could say i have a bad hearth and i'm willing to get some sickness back just to get a new hearth. Chances are your bad hearth is genetic and so your clone would also be succeptible to have a bad hearth too.

i'm well adjusted with my present bodyparts and i don't think that killing someone just to get new ones is a good idea.
 
Human cloning isn't all what its cracked up to be, it won't make you immortal and it won't give you a reliable source of loyal troopers. Frankly, it's quite pointless to clone humans other than to show that you are able to.

Bringing back extinct animals like the mammoth would be a cool thing though.
 
Here is a very interesting article by Ray Kurzweil, the major theoretician on AI: Read The Future of Life. He has some interesting views on how consciousness is not some ethereal object that is the analogous to the soul. Rather consciousness is the physical state of neurons. This state can soon be recorded with high resolution tools and transferred to either a computer or even a cloned brain. So there may come a time after you die when you can continue on in a new body and new brain from where you left off.
 
But to use the spareparts you would have to "grow" your clone
Click to expand...

No, this is not the case. Say that your liver has been damaged do to excessive drinking. Well, if someone died a long time ago and their healtyh liver was picked for cloning, then they could use the tissue samples from the liver and clone an exact duplicate of the healthy one.

Also, unless the childhood diseases affected, lets use the liver again, a new one would most likely not be susceptible to dieases. Your immune system is a lot more advanced and powerful, so to say, and could easily ward off any such attempts to sicken you.

On another note, besides mono, what diseases did you get as a child? If you answer with a flu or a cold, well your still likely to get the same problem again.
 
Genetic cloning is commonly advocated by infertile couples for the pure purpose of having children. But that very goal is flawed. To necessitate a new and individual person, both a sperm and an egg cell need to be joined together. (Yes, welcome to Sex Ed.) The main importance of this joining is so that genes in the chromosomes coming from both parents are merged together. Thus, the child gains different attributes from both parents.

But as for genetic cloning in order to have a child, only one person is the "donor". There is no genetic exchange so that the cloned child could be considered as both the father's or the mother's. It is only either solely the mother's or solely the father's. So basically, the clone is a mere copy of the "donor", not a child of both parents. And since the donor contains the genes of their mother and father, the donor is really just making themselves a brother or sister.

I had a serious discussion in my biology class in school. The entire class was split between the pros and cons. I'm from a Catholic highschool, to boot, and the class was further divided into hardnosed orthodox or liberal. I recall this debate lasting over a week.
 
Would you have to clone an intire person, or could you just clone a part. For instance you just "grow" an arm?
 
Jacen said:
Would you have to clone an intire person, or could you just clone a part. For instance you just "grow" an arm?
Click to expand...

At this time, no. There are researches who have managed to grow things like human skin, cartilage and even heart musculature in a lab though. Skin and cartilage are apparently quite easy, but growing a complex organ like a liver are a couple of the years in the future though.

As it looks now, they will be able to grow the organs themselves, without having to use "spare part humans". The wonders of stem cell research...

Of course, this has nothing to do with cloning really.
 
Azael said:
As it looks now, they will be able to grow the organs themselves, without having to use "spare part humans". The wonders of stem cell research...

Of course, this has nothing to do with cloning really.
Click to expand...
Same with ageing. Cloning won't do much for that (which is why I find the Raelians funny). The best bet for immortality is genetic research. Ageing is caused by your cells naturally dividing as you age, only, each time they divide, imperfections are created. IE: The two new split cells are slightly less perfect than the original whole cell. They mucked around in a lab and created a cell that divided a lot of times perfectly once. That's the step to anti-ageing and immortality.
 
clone

Lukav said:
On another note, besides mono, what diseases did you get as a child? If you answer with a flu or a cold, well your still likely to get the same problem again.
Click to expand...

How about Hepatitis. How about small pox, how about yellow fever?

Would you like to get small pox as an adult, or yellow fever?
The child disease you get as kid are far more dangerous when you get them later in life when you are an adult.
Remember your tetanos shots when you were a kid? .. didn't think so. Get one now as an adult (if you are, no pun intended) and it hurts like a bitch, now get it every seven years and it seems to get worst everytime. I've had four in my life and they don't get easier. So a new bodypart might be at risk of getting those diseases.

As for the liver being damaged by drinking, you think getting a new one is going to keep that person from doing it again? when he knows that he can get a replacement one later on???
Click to expand...
 
Re: clone

Ugly John said:
As for the liver being damaged by drinking, you think getting a new one is going to keep that person from doing it again? when he knows that he can get a replacement one later on???
Click to expand...

Probably not
 
>Bringing back extinct animals like the mammoth would be a cool thing though.

Yeah, and of corse dronts, quaggas, seecows, kauri krausschwanz and this pinguin kind ...

EDIT:>Don't be, it's only from reading popular science magazines, not actual study in the field.

Vetenskapen's Värld?
 
Illustrerad Vetenskap, National Geographic, Discovery Channel, Vetenskapens Värld, Nova, etc.

What we Swedes call dront is known as the Dodo bird to English speaking people, BTW. Not sure if it's possible to bring that one back though, since you need some genetic material in order to clone it. The mammoth might be possible because some of them have been in deep freeze since the last ice age. Dinosaurs are impossible though, any genetic material is long since gone so a real Jurassic Park is out of the question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top