cmac Posted February 22, 2004 Author Share Posted February 22, 2004 Just how moronic are you people?!!!!!!!!! Cloning will not really advance for another 25 years minimum.Perhaps 25 years, perhaps more. But, how do we develop skills? Practice! And, without practice, we can't really hone those skills to a point where the pros outweigh the cons. Untill then, we are just creating another human life to experiment on!Astute observation. That is the purpose of cloning. What is the point of making precious life if it is not going to be used in the way it is supposed to be used in?We could spawn another whole debate from that question. If clones aren't used in the way they're supposed to be used in now, what is the way they're supposed to be used in? Are the failed clones supposed to be allowed to live a pained, misfigured life, or should they be euthanised? I don't know about you, but I don't want to have to be the 3 week-old test-tube baby getting shocked and injected with 1000 needles a day, only to die and not only waste my life, but the valuable time in the lives of others. First, they don't shock babies. Come on! Don't they teach you anything in school? What purpose could shocking a living being (departing, for the moment, from cardiopulmonary refibrillation and fusing cells) have? Yes, I know 1,000 is an exaggeration, but it wouldn't be an inane amount of needles that would be injected into the specimen as much as material taken. How would your life be wasted by an experimental clone dieing? Unless you are the genetic scientist, in which case you would have many more experiments on which to depend on, you or anyone else are affected in no way by a specimen dieing. We think being told we're adopted is bad!!!! Imagine getting home from school and having your "parents" tell you that you were made from another person who is better than you now, anyway!!!!The clone's father would be exactly the same as the clone itself. The embryo injected into the foster mother would be pre-fertilized, so the mother would not have any genetic impact on the result. You would be exactly the same as the father, providing the genes are unmodified prior to insertion. Just how moronic are you people?!!!!!!!!! Not very. But, considering the errors I just pointed out in your statement, you could do with a self-reflection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Thief Oriana Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 And through all of this, we have got to remember: cloning does not affect personality. That is important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narynzine Posted February 27, 2004 Share Posted February 27, 2004 I'm kinda borderline about cloning.On one hand i think it would be highly useful if we could clone body parts etc for organ transplants or ppl who have lost a limb etc. Plus we can bring back formally extinct animals(like the Dodo) and clone more of endangered species to keep them from becoming extinct. On the other hand, there are far too many humans on this world already. Cloning people would only make the overpopulation crisis even worse(plus i like being different from everybody else and i think my family/friends would hang themselves if there was more than one of me).Plus, to counter my good point about the endangered/extinct animals: Wouldn't that make their lives worth less? Poachers and fur etc hunters(and just plain sickos) could kill even more animals than they do now with the view of 'well they can always make more so it doesn't matter'. Plus a 3rd matter of scientists obsession with Dinosaurs. How long do you think it'll be till some bright spark has the idea to clone something like a T-Rex? Apart from the fact they're not meant to be around anymore you can guarantee the thing will get loose eventually and go on a stampede!I can see a real life version of Jurassic Park coming up, what a horrid thought.... <_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevermore Posted February 28, 2004 Share Posted February 28, 2004 Plus a 3rd matter of scientists obsession with Dinosaurs. How long do you think it'll be till some bright spark has the idea to clone something like a T-Rex? Apart from the fact they're not meant to be around anymore you can guarantee the thing will get loose eventually and go on a stampede!I can see a real life version of Jurassic Park coming up, what a horrid thought.... Not sure they even have dinosaur DNA. But if they do: Why not clone them. As for you "fact" that their not supposed to be around I just don't see why not. If you realy feared it would escape and kill, then we should kill any animal capable of hurting us since they might escape. And so what if they did? It's only dinosaurs. Do you realy think modern day technology would have a problem killing a few rouge dinos? Gernades, bazookas, tranques (screw dosage, just fill oil drums and pump it all through a harpon fitted with a tube).... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmac Posted February 28, 2004 Author Share Posted February 28, 2004 Do you realy think modern day technology would have a problem killing a few rouge dinos? Ever seen Jurassic Park? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted February 28, 2004 Share Posted February 28, 2004 Ever seen Jurassic Park? Yes, it's a movie. They can't show the threat being dealt with as it would be in the real world because it wouldn't be entertaining. The movie would be over 5 minuites after they escaped as the local air force sent in an A-10 strike and 30mm anti-tank rounds turned them into clouds of blood. Second, you're way underestimating the difficulty of producing these clones. What do you think would happen if you tried to grow a sheep clone in a human mother? It wouldn't work. Trying to clone these extinct species would be just as impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmac Posted February 28, 2004 Author Share Posted February 28, 2004 Ever seen Jurassic Park?Yes, it's a movie. They can't show the threat being dealt with as it would be in the real world because it wouldn't be entertaining. The movie would be over 5 minuites after they escaped as the local air force sent in an A-10 strike and 30mm anti-tank rounds turned them into clouds of blood. I know- I was attempting humour. Failed, apparently. Second, you're way underestimating the difficulty of producing these clones. What do you think would happen if you tried to grow a sheep clone in a human mother? It wouldn't work. Trying to clone these extinct species would be just as impossible. I didn't suggest this (^), but I'll comment. I agree with Peregrine on this matter- what exactly would you incubate a dinosaur infant in? Unless we have a dinosaur womb (or very large incubator) I would think the feat would be impossible. The most the public has eveet been aware of is cloning a sheep. Many disillusioned people (probably the ones that saw Jurassic Park :P) would strongly oppose this, no matter how safe the project might be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted February 28, 2004 Share Posted February 28, 2004 On the other hand, there are far too many humans on this world already. Cloning people would only make the overpopulation crisis even worse. Take a look at reality please. No matter how simple cloning gets, it's always going to be much easier and cheaper to reproduce the traditional way. Cloning will never become a significant part of the overall birth rate. Even if it did, that's not going to change the difficulty of raising those children. Families could easily have 15 children, but almost none do. There's a good reason the average family has 1-3 kids, and it's not because of the difficulty of getting them. All cloning would do is change the source of those 1-3 children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevermore Posted February 28, 2004 Share Posted February 28, 2004 What do you think would happen if you tried to grow a sheep clone in a human mother? It wouldn't work. Trying to clone these extinct species would be just as impossible. You don't need a womb. Just somthing to simulate it. Just feed the umbilical cord the right stuff and presto. Getting a live dinosaur in the futer (say 100 years) is not that hard to imagine. Why we would need to have one, and why we study dinos at all is a mystery to me but cloning them isn't impossable one you get the method down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narynzine Posted February 28, 2004 Share Posted February 28, 2004 Not sure they even have dinosaur DNA. But if they do: Why not clone them. As for you "fact" that their not supposed to be around I just don't see why not. If you realy feared it would escape and kill, then we should kill any animal capable of hurting us since they might escape. And so what if they did? It's only dinosaurs. Do you realy think modern day technology would have a problem killing a few rouge dinos? Gernades, bazookas, tranques (screw dosage, just fill oil drums and pump it all through a harpon fitted with a tube)....Course they do, there's DNA in bones, and they can get it from stuff preserved in amber. There's a difference between, say a Lion getting loose and a 50 fott T-Rex getting loose! A T-Rex could eat 10 times or so more than a lion can:P Why not? It's evolution or whatever. It'd be chaos to the natural world if we brought Dino's back, animals have evolved since then and aren't really equipped to fight off huge lizards anymore:) Take a look at reality please. No matter how simple cloning gets, it's always going to be much easier and cheaper to reproduce the traditional way. Cloning will never become a significant part of the overall birth rate. Even if it did, that's not going to change the difficulty of raising those children. Families could easily have 15 children, but almost none do. There's a good reason the average family has 1-3 kids, and it's not because of the difficulty of getting them. All cloning would do is change the source of those 1-3 children.What would stop people from bringing back ppl that have died? Either for study purposes, curiosity or the bereaved that have lost a loved one. Anyway, soon they won't need a womb to clone people, they're sure to invent a machine sooner or later that can do the same job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.