|
|
| Human cloning (747324) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (747324) | |
Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 07:38:20 2011 Am I the only person who sees no ethical problem with cloning a human being? There isn't much of a good reason to do it, but I don't see how it would be wrong for someone to clone themselves out of vanity and raising the cloned child. |
|
|
| (747329) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Mar 6 07:49:49 2011, in response to Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 07:38:20 2011. One of the problems associated with cloning animals is that the clone sometimes ages rapidly to the biological age of the cells it is cloned from. Other problems include susceptibility to disease, DNA transcription errors, and the obvious creation of a second-class tier of human beings, something that has long been a staple of science-fiction writers. |
|
|
| (747334) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by RockParkMan on Sun Mar 6 08:34:40 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Mar 6 07:49:49 2011. Who needs biotech to create a second-class tier of human beings. Just use supply side economics. This is why there needs to be zero tolerance for that ideology. It is the rightful duty of Government to hunt down and incarcerate these dangerous people. |
|
|
| (747336) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Mar 6 08:36:29 2011, in response to Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 07:38:20 2011. If you want to see how dangerous this could be , two weinbergs, two kadafi's, two sheen's etc etc. |
|
|
| (747348) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Sun Mar 6 08:57:16 2011, in response to Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 07:38:20 2011. There's probably more of an ethical problem if you are religious because you don't know if the clone would have a soul. |
|
|
| (747357) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Sun Mar 6 09:07:23 2011, in response to Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 07:38:20 2011. It would take the 'sacred' out of "every sperm is sacred". Other than that, go ahead.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (747388) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by RockParkMan on Sun Mar 6 09:51:57 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Mar 6 08:36:29 2011. two Reagans, Two Hitlers, two Limbaughs. |
|
|
| (747396) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 6 10:14:48 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by RockParkMan on Sun Mar 6 09:51:57 2011. As much as genetics is fun to talk about, it's important to remember that a clone, if done on humans, would be nothing more than an identical twin born years late. Identical twins are far from identical (doubly so in the case of clones where no doubt the mitochondrial DNA will be different, unless they get an egg from your mom), only being 50% similar even in some of the most "inborn" traits, like sexual orientation. No doubt a clone will share many traits with his/her progenitor, but it will be no more similar to his/her twin than any other twin. Duplicating Einstein, Jonas Salk or Martin Luther King would not be possible by cloning or any other means potentially available in the foreseeable future. |
|
|
| (747406) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Sun Mar 6 10:37:29 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 6 10:14:48 2011. I don't know what you are talking about but you are evidently intelligent based on the fact you are writing about Mitchchondial DNA and other stuff like that. I can't even pronounce that word much less understand it. As a means of comparison, I'm sitting here wondering if Ollie P and Luis Castillo are coming north with the Mets if that tells you anything about the depth of my thinking. |
|
|
| (747414) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by gOlD_12tH on Sun Mar 6 10:59:01 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Mar 6 08:36:29 2011. two weinberg's will probably be massacre. |
|
|
| (747428) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:20:20 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Mar 6 07:49:49 2011. You don't get it. Those are technological problems. I was talking about moral and ethical problems. Your final comment about "second-class tier of human beings" is bullshit. In what way would clones be second-class? Do you consider identical twins not to be distinct individuals? They are "clones" of each other. |
|
|
| (747431) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:21:08 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Easy on Sun Mar 6 08:57:16 2011. So twins share a single soul? Religion is all made up anyway. |
|
|
| (747437) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Mar 6 11:24:25 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:20:20 2011. Identical twins are not copies of each other, they are genetically identical from conception. |
|
|
| (747446) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by tunnelrat on Sun Mar 6 11:32:41 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Fred G on Sun Mar 6 09:07:23 2011. Every body is missing the real BIG point,now think about this real carefully-2 BRIAN`S.A true crime against GOD&NATURE. |
|
|
| (747450) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by TonyG on Sun Mar 6 11:35:32 2011, in response to Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 07:38:20 2011. No. I'm totally opposed to human cloning as well. |
|
|
| (747457) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Sun Mar 6 11:38:14 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:21:08 2011. No idea. I'm not sayin. I'm just sayin. |
|
|
| (747464) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Mar 6 11:40:51 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Easy on Sun Mar 6 08:57:16 2011. A "soul" as in a spirit component? If not, then the clone won't be able to learn anything. |
|
|
| (747467) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Mar 6 11:41:47 2011, in response to Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 07:38:20 2011. Am I the only person who sees no ethical problem with cloning a human being?Depends on what ethics you are referring to. I don't see it as any different from twinning, myself; you aren't going to solve the problem of shortened telomeres, though. |
|
|
| (747468) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by TonyG on Sun Mar 6 11:41:47 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:21:08 2011. No. Every human being has their own soul.I'm sure that clones would as well. |
|
|
| (747472) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:44:09 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Mar 6 11:24:25 2011. Making them COPIES OF ONE ANOTHER. |
|
|
| (747474) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:45:05 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by TonyG on Sun Mar 6 11:41:47 2011. Yes, if there were such a thing as a soul. So either way it doesn't matter. And clones would not be a "second-tier class of human beings" by their nature. |
|
|
| (747475) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:45:21 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Mar 6 11:40:51 2011. LOL! You are fucking insane. |
|
|
| (747478) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Mar 6 11:46:53 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:45:21 2011. No, you're prejudiced. There's a reason why animals can't learn, and it has nothing to do with the brain. |
|
|
| (747484) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:51:14 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Mar 6 11:46:53 2011. Yes, it has EVERYTHING to do with the brain. And animals CAN learn. They learn all the time! |
|
|
| (747527) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 6 13:56:58 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Mar 6 11:24:25 2011. Actually, identical twins ARE copies of each other, more so than clones would ever be because of mtDNA. Aside from the technical issues you mentioned such as aged cells, twinning is an example of what cloning would be like. |
|
|
| (747528) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 6 13:59:13 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:45:21 2011. You know, for the purpose of putting some religious ideas to the test, I say we should go ahead and clone humans, just to stir things up a bit... |
|
|
| (747529) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Mar 6 14:05:53 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 6 13:59:13 2011. just imagine a person like hitler with a cloning program.the boys from brasil ring a bell. nice all arian race all the way ??? Or maybe a Bin Laden with an all out race on Muslim creations ?? |
|
|
| (747584) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Mar 6 15:58:40 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Mar 6 08:36:29 2011. /thread! :) |
|
|
| (747585) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sun Mar 6 15:58:41 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 6 13:56:58 2011. Does that mean that one of the twins lacks a soul?Does the soulless have a higher IQ? |
|
|
| (747589) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 16:06:31 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 6 13:56:58 2011. It is possible for a clone to have identical mtDNA if it's a clone of a woman and she donates her own egg for the somatic cell nuclear transfer.Or some as yet undeveloped method using the adult cell exclusively without a donor egg. |
|
|
| (747591) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 16:07:49 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Mar 6 14:05:53 2011. So what? The problem with cloning Hitler is the boy will grow up knowing that he's the clone of Hitler. He won't actually become a "new Hitler" because IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY! |
|
|
| (747606) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 6 16:26:27 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Mar 6 14:05:53 2011. I was being facetious more than anything, to mess with religious nuts that talk about "souls". Unfortunately, sooner or later, someone is going to develop the technology to clone humans. It would then be inevitable that it will fall into the hands of sinister people. But I think they will have a hard time doing what they think they can do with cloning (because, really, cloning would only be a marginal improvement over good old eugenics, especially on any useful timescale). One could make a million clones of Hitler (tough without a million surrogate moms, but OK) and they wouldn't necessarily be anything like the Füher because Hitler was both a product of his genetics and the world in which he lived -- and plain old chance. I doubt simply having someone with a personality similar to Hitler's would bring around a Fourth Reich by itself. |
|
|
| (747607) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 6 16:27:29 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by SMAZ on Sun Mar 6 15:58:41 2011. Good questions...let's ask Olog... ;) |
|
|
| (747610) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Sun Mar 6 16:29:19 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 16:06:31 2011. It is possible for a clone to have identical mtDNA if it's a clone of a woman and she donates her own egg for the somatic cell nuclear transfer.Indeed. But nonetheless, the clone will be no more similar to its progenitor than identical twins are to each other. |
|
|
| (747616) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Mar 6 16:36:22 2011, in response to Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 07:38:20 2011. No you are not. |
|
|
| (747703) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by vfrt on Sun Mar 6 18:05:40 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by RockParkMan on Sun Mar 6 08:34:40 2011. Worse than cloning is the creation of half-humans. For years rumors of grusome breeding experiments that created human-animal hybrids. Man-Apes created in Florida in the 1930s and in Russia in the 1970s. In both case the horrific offspring was killed soon after birth. It's legal to combine cells between humans and animals but only up to a few cell-divisions. But who knows what really has been created. The Germans (who else) did experiments with human and hamster cells but were ordered to stop by their government. Gives me the chills. |
|
|
| (747707) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 18:09:10 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by vfrt on Sun Mar 6 18:05:40 2011. That is all just total bullshit.But who knows what really has been created. Anybody who has a brain because they don't believe in insane conspiracy theories. |
|
|
| (747767) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Mar 6 20:40:55 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 11:44:09 2011. No, they're not "copies" of each other, as even "identical" twins develop differently in the womb, and have little differences in each individual's DNA code. |
|
|
| (748894) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Mar 9 00:50:16 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Mar 6 20:40:55 2011. First, they do not have any differences in their DNA code, that's what makes them IDENTICAL TWINS!Second, what exactly is your point? A human clone would be even more different than an identical twin because it would incubate in a different womb (usually) and be younger. |
|
|
| (748947) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Wed Mar 9 12:11:32 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Mar 9 00:50:16 2011. First, they do not have any differences in their DNA code, that's what makes them IDENTICAL TWINS!Actually, JayZee is correct, it has been fairly recently discovered that identical twins DO have tiny differences in their genetic code. So, genetically speaking, they are not 100% identical (but very, very close). A human clone would be even more different than an identical twin because it would incubate in a different womb (usually) and be younger. I don't think gestation in a different womb would make a clone any more different than MZ twins are from each other, but the generational differences (and issues like telomeres, etc) would have an effect. |
|
|
| (748951) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Mar 9 12:21:48 2011, in response to Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 6 07:38:20 2011. Only if the clones are produced on Geonosis. |
|
|
| (748952) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Wed Mar 9 12:25:54 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Mar 6 20:40:55 2011. No, they're not "copies" of each other, as even "identical" twins develop differently in the wombWhile you're right about differential development of MZ twins in utero, a process called developmental noise (which is likely responsible for a good share of the differences between MZ twins), you're misunderstanding the concept here. This doesn't make them any less "copies" of one another (which they ARE), and clones would be just as different from their progenitors because of the same effects. and have little differences in each individual's DNA code. And while this is correct (as recently discovered, as I explained to Spider-Pig), clones would likely have much of the same minute differences, as these are due to mutation. |
|
|
| (748980) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Mar 9 14:38:08 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by JayMan on Wed Mar 9 12:11:32 2011. Actually, JayZee is correct, it has been fairly recently discovered that identical twins DO have tiny differences in their genetic code. So, genetically speaking, they are not 100% identical (but very, very close).Did not know that. How does that work? |
|
|
| (748991) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Wed Mar 9 15:05:41 2011, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Mar 9 14:38:08 2011. Unfortunately I don't have a free link to the paper. But DNA sequencing has discovered tiny differences in the DNA of MZ twins, stemming from copying errors (mutations). |
|
|
| (1165887) | |
Re: Human cloning |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Mar 19 21:46:39 2014, in response to Re: Human cloning, posted by TonyG on Sun Mar 6 11:35:32 2011. Why? |
|
|