First Human Clone?
A company started by religious nuts (even religious people in the forums will agree that these guys are nuts) have claimed to clone the first human.
I go on record as being against this, although not against cloning (even reproductive cloning) provided all the proper controls were employed. This is not what this group has done. They rushed forward with an imperfect technique because their faith, not science, demanded it.
I make a special point about this because I'm sure I will see the typical "we must stop these mad scientists!" rant on sunday morning talk shows and AM radio, but it is worth noting that their motivation isn't scientific.
On a side note, I once saw the beginning of a "Touched by an Angel" episode (my remote control was busted) and the plot had something to do with a woman scientist that was trying to be the first to clone a human and she stated rather matter of fact like that everyone knows that the first scientist to clone a human would get the noble prize. I wonder how many people actually have such a skewed impression of the scientific community to think that this stunt will get a noble prize.
[ 12-27-2002: Message edited by: Nordstrodamus ]</p>
I go on record as being against this, although not against cloning (even reproductive cloning) provided all the proper controls were employed. This is not what this group has done. They rushed forward with an imperfect technique because their faith, not science, demanded it.
I make a special point about this because I'm sure I will see the typical "we must stop these mad scientists!" rant on sunday morning talk shows and AM radio, but it is worth noting that their motivation isn't scientific.
On a side note, I once saw the beginning of a "Touched by an Angel" episode (my remote control was busted) and the plot had something to do with a woman scientist that was trying to be the first to clone a human and she stated rather matter of fact like that everyone knows that the first scientist to clone a human would get the noble prize. I wonder how many people actually have such a skewed impression of the scientific community to think that this stunt will get a noble prize.
[ 12-27-2002: Message edited by: Nordstrodamus ]</p>
Comments
2. If it is true the baby will die soon.
<strong>here they are saying in the newspapers and tv news (on right now!!) that the baby was born in "america" and america = in here it means USA. the journalists here suck ... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, I guess it was born in North America....
<strong>Why will the baby die soon?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because a bunch of whackos will call it an abomination against god, and in the name of love, peace, and light track it down and eliminate it.
<strong>here they are saying in the newspapers and tv news (on right now!!) that the baby was born in "america" and america = in here it means USA. the journalists here suck ... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
America often means the USA here [in the usa] as well. when remakring on other sections of the continents, they are usually given more adjectives, as in South America, or the countries themselves are referred to, ex: Canada.
<strong>
Because a bunch of whackos will call it an abomination against god, and in the name of love, peace, and light track it down and eliminate it.
It is an alien afterall.
I am by no means religous but does a cloned baby actually have a soul? I really think that a baby that is cloned would not be the same as a normal baby produced in the normal way like you and I?
"She was born yesterday at 11:55 a.m. in the country where she was born. She is fine."
<hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
<strong>I am by no means religous but does a cloned baby actually have a soul?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Of course she has a soul silly. I just got into this discussion about 15 minutes ago with a friend. She has 'a' soul but not the 'same' soul as her mother. Cloning is biological, simple in a way. Like injection molded plastics, we're all just shells. It's the juice inside that makes us 'us'. Therefore, little Eve is a clone as we should expect ? like a twin born 20 years too late. Physically the same, but not the same.
Also like you, I have no religious qualms about this. To me a soul is just a combination of intelligent electricity and biology not yet understood. We're still very young mentally. Monkeys with Machines.
-G
<strong>I really dont like the idea of cloning.
I am by no means religous but does a cloned baby actually have a soul? I really think that a baby that is cloned would not be the same as a normal baby produced in the normal way like you and I?</strong><hr></blockquote>You're not religious but you're talking about souls? Does an identical twin not have a soul?
[quote]Originally posted by trailmaster308:
<strong>Why will the baby die soon?</strong><hr></blockquote>I'm just guessing that because it is my understanding that they haven't perfected the technique yet. They went through many trials when they were fiddling with cloning sheep and other organisms. Apparently it's a delicate enough process that it's extremely easy to introduce tiny errors into the replicaion, and those errors can easily result in serious deformities and death.
These cloners are evil. They should be stopped. We are not god, and should never act as one.
Religion to me would denote some sort of belief in a god or gods.
These folks claim to believe that space aliens created life on earth by genetic manipulation.
I know they may give themselves religious ranks (bishop and so forth) and claim religious status but what about their beliefs make it a religion?
Are we to believe that those who believe in life in space are now religious fanatics? How about if they use the belief in life in space and combine it with scientific processes here on earth to advance their "beliefs."
What the heck is this?
Nick
if cloning could be done within means that would ensure no actual human life were toyed with (i.e. organs with no attachment to anything), i might be in favor of it.
but right now, those fring scientists and groups that are trying seem to me to be the slimiest of the sleaze -- based only off what i have read and seen in the ever-so-honest media (sarcasm). <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
<strong>Poor Eve. She will be studied, laughed at and stared at for the rest of her life.
These cloners are evil. They should be stopped. We are not god, and should never act as one.</strong><hr></blockquote>
no kidding. i thought i had it rough growing up... "hi, i am a clone of my mommy!" and they had to name her "eve." how f'n profound. someone get me a gag bucket.
[ 12-28-2002: Message edited by: Aquatic ]</p>
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
this is all fine and dandy as a normal human being most likely will not live long enough to deplete this "stockpile" of expendable genetic material...
But a clone starts out with 20 years of this buffer zone depleted because the cloned genetic material is already 20 old... this may cause the clone to have serious genetic defects later on in its life (maybe even early in life if most of the replication happens in the womb...I think this is valid, but I'm not sure)
so basicly, unless the cloning material was taken soon after early replication in the womb... chances are bad things could happen to the clone because of this lack of a "buffer zone"....
now I don't know if they have figured out a way to add more meaningless data onto the DNA so this doesn't happen... but it should be a concern... it has to happen to every end of every strand of DNA in the cells used in cloning, or problems could present themselves...