Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
First Human Clone Born!
- Thread starter Mr. Anderson
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Cloning is a process with the history of milliards of years... Though the old technology only allowed making of a clone from a pair of DNA spirals, a mix... But there is no difference. And it's not scary at all, it won't lead to the creation of armies of super soldiers, copies of great people and politicians and so on... For these tasks there is a cheaper and more effective way.
Science is good. Religious sects - bad (religious organizations - ok)
P.S. Aliens? Abductions? Puff... Eeh... Well...
Science is good. Religious sects - bad (religious organizations - ok)
P.S. Aliens? Abductions? Puff... Eeh... Well...
Here's an "enlightening" article about the Raelians.
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/news2.html
And we're supposed to believe that these idiots managed to clone a human being 🙄
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/news2.html
And we're supposed to believe that these idiots managed to clone a human being 🙄
oh my god how stupid can you be?
you think i would really go out there, kill all of them and post pics of their dead bodies on macrumors? i was expressing my anger of them creating irritating noises near my house and their foolish beliefs
i would never even crossed that line of insulting them directly, but know that if you seen them you would be pissed off at them like i am
and yes, i would go to jail if i killed them ...🙄
wdlove
macrumors P6
1981, Elizabeth Jordan Carr, the 1st American test tube baby, was born in Norfolk, VA.
2002, Group says it cloned human, Many voice doubt on the birth of girl Raelian leader wears Star Trek style suit, believe mankind from extraterrestrial beings, founder of Clonaid - Girl, Eve born by caesarian section 11:55am 12/26 Thursday to a 31 year old American.
***Announcement shifts focus to legal limits, Michael Guillen, scientist, formerly an ABC Science Correspondent will report DNA findings in 7 days.
2002, Group says it cloned human, Many voice doubt on the birth of girl Raelian leader wears Star Trek style suit, believe mankind from extraterrestrial beings, founder of Clonaid - Girl, Eve born by caesarian section 11:55am 12/26 Thursday to a 31 year old American.
***Announcement shifts focus to legal limits, Michael Guillen, scientist, formerly an ABC Science Correspondent will report DNA findings in 7 days.
Mal
macrumors 603
Did anyone else notice the name of the "alien" the Raelien leader supposedly met with?
YAWEH ELOHIM!
Those are two of the names of God in Hebrew. The guy that made up this stuff wasn't totally crazy, he was creating an elaborate deception to lure these people in there where he could watch all the sick stuff they do. I'm willing to bet they aren't crazy either, and I don't think even they believe this is a real clone, they just want to lure in more followers. It's a hoax, a pretty good one too, and should be shot down as one as soon as the DNA evidence comes in.
I agree with religious freedom, but I certainly don't have to agree with what people of other religions do, even if I don't have the right to stop them. These people are sick!
JW
YAWEH ELOHIM!
Those are two of the names of God in Hebrew. The guy that made up this stuff wasn't totally crazy, he was creating an elaborate deception to lure these people in there where he could watch all the sick stuff they do. I'm willing to bet they aren't crazy either, and I don't think even they believe this is a real clone, they just want to lure in more followers. It's a hoax, a pretty good one too, and should be shot down as one as soon as the DNA evidence comes in.
I agree with religious freedom, but I certainly don't have to agree with what people of other religions do, even if I don't have the right to stop them. These people are sick!
JW
kiwi_the_iwik
macrumors 65816
Why I think it's wrong...
I'm outraged by this - and I'm surprised the world governments, or even the United Nations, didn't take steps to stop it. Human cloning is wrong and immoral, plain and simple.
If two people want to bring another individual into the world, then they should:
1. Do it the old fashioned way,
2. Try IVF, if they're unable to do 1., or
3. Adopt - there are millions of unwanted/orphaned children in the world who are not given the opportunities of other children, and need the love of responsible parents.
I'm not against cell cloning - in fact, the idea poses a very interesting and viable solution to such things as organ transplants (or even limb transplants) with no fear of rejection, and no need for carconogenic drugs to ward off future infections that you have to take for the rest of your (shortened) life.
For example - imagine being able to have a heart grown for you - using your own DNA - as a replacement for yours if you suffer from heart disease. Or if you lose an arm, to have a duplicate grown for you in a lab, to be reattached with no possibility of rejection, because your body thinks it's your arm...
We were created by a process that started billions of years ago - who are we to change the process? Are we trying to take the place of God? What have we to gain by creating our own life? Just to say that we can do it?
I don't accept that.
The fact is, that nobody really knows what might happen to this new generation of humankind. You could call this new race of people many things - hybrids, clones, or even replicants. What troubles me is that it's not a natural process - that there may be many complications as their lives, or even as their generations, progress. There might be - at a molecular level - physical or mental defects, or perhaps sterility, that may surface after time. And if that happens many years (or centuries) down the track, then humanity may have killed itself off by its own arrogant blind pig-ignorance.
I'm outraged by this - and I'm surprised the world governments, or even the United Nations, didn't take steps to stop it. Human cloning is wrong and immoral, plain and simple.
If two people want to bring another individual into the world, then they should:
1. Do it the old fashioned way,
2. Try IVF, if they're unable to do 1., or
3. Adopt - there are millions of unwanted/orphaned children in the world who are not given the opportunities of other children, and need the love of responsible parents.
I'm not against cell cloning - in fact, the idea poses a very interesting and viable solution to such things as organ transplants (or even limb transplants) with no fear of rejection, and no need for carconogenic drugs to ward off future infections that you have to take for the rest of your (shortened) life.
For example - imagine being able to have a heart grown for you - using your own DNA - as a replacement for yours if you suffer from heart disease. Or if you lose an arm, to have a duplicate grown for you in a lab, to be reattached with no possibility of rejection, because your body thinks it's your arm...
We were created by a process that started billions of years ago - who are we to change the process? Are we trying to take the place of God? What have we to gain by creating our own life? Just to say that we can do it?
I don't accept that.
The fact is, that nobody really knows what might happen to this new generation of humankind. You could call this new race of people many things - hybrids, clones, or even replicants. What troubles me is that it's not a natural process - that there may be many complications as their lives, or even as their generations, progress. There might be - at a molecular level - physical or mental defects, or perhaps sterility, that may surface after time. And if that happens many years (or centuries) down the track, then humanity may have killed itself off by its own arrogant blind pig-ignorance.
wdlove
macrumors P6
The FDA is investigating, but not formally yet. Scientists predict that as many as 20 clones will be born in 2003. Clinics to be set up in almost all continents!
Eve is due to land somewhere in the US today?
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/30/national/30CLON.html?todaysheadlines
Eve is due to land somewhere in the US today?
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/30/national/30CLON.html?todaysheadlines
I'd be seriously pissed if someone cloned me without my consensus. I consider myself cc bcc(tm) 😀
Although the copyright owners could be my parents...
kiwi_the_iwik
macrumors 65816
Sorry, skunk. Maybe I didn't make myself clear...
If the cloned limb or organ is to be transplanted to you, then only you should be the one to supply the cells required for the cloning to commence. And no one else.
Therefore, if the cells originated from you, then the rights of those cells would not be compromised (if, in fact, a limb has rights... ...hmmm).
😉
If the cloned limb or organ is to be transplanted to you, then only you should be the one to supply the cells required for the cloning to commence. And no one else.
Therefore, if the cells originated from you, then the rights of those cells would not be compromised (if, in fact, a limb has rights... ...hmmm).
😉
kiwi_the_iwik
macrumors 65816
Now you're just being silly.
I'm talking about limbs and organs, and not reproducing humans. That's what I class to be immoral.
I'm talking about limbs and organs, and not reproducing humans. That's what I class to be immoral.
skunk
macrumors G4
No, it's just a "reductio ad absurdum". I think the point is valid. Are these cloned parts just lumps of meat? We generally assume that a "person" resides in his or her head, but the very techniques of cloning mean that you can in theory reproduce a "person" from their toe-nail. This does raise interesting questions.
kiwi_the_iwik
macrumors 65816
Just going back to your previous point skunk -
If your body is "knackered", then I'm figuring there's going to be no argument as to it's rights - considering your consciousness resides in your head (and I can't see it being cloned, as to transplant the knowledge from one brain to another is nigh on impossible), your rights should theoretically end there.
An example is if you are involved in an accident, where a limb may be damaged in such a way that amputation is an option. I doubt whether doctors will have an in-depth theological debate as to the rights of a mangled limb. And, I'd imagine, you would have no hesitation - if given the option, and the technology - to agree to a replacement limb to be cultured in a laboratory, to be reattached at the earliest convenience.
I saw an interesting (if not, macabre) documentary on Channel 4 about a year ago - it was on people who hated their limbs so much, they would go as far as to have them amputated. And I'm talking about actual working arms and legs, with no abnormalities. So, after a series of psychiatric evaluations, they were allowed to become amputees. Although I don't believe these people should have had their wish (I think they should be on medication, personally), their point was noted seriously by health and psychiatrists alike - and they all came to the same conclusion to allow the procedures to take place.
If that is the case, then your argument about the rights of limbs is superfluous - there are none.
🙂
If your body is "knackered", then I'm figuring there's going to be no argument as to it's rights - considering your consciousness resides in your head (and I can't see it being cloned, as to transplant the knowledge from one brain to another is nigh on impossible), your rights should theoretically end there.
An example is if you are involved in an accident, where a limb may be damaged in such a way that amputation is an option. I doubt whether doctors will have an in-depth theological debate as to the rights of a mangled limb. And, I'd imagine, you would have no hesitation - if given the option, and the technology - to agree to a replacement limb to be cultured in a laboratory, to be reattached at the earliest convenience.
I saw an interesting (if not, macabre) documentary on Channel 4 about a year ago - it was on people who hated their limbs so much, they would go as far as to have them amputated. And I'm talking about actual working arms and legs, with no abnormalities. So, after a series of psychiatric evaluations, they were allowed to become amputees. Although I don't believe these people should have had their wish (I think they should be on medication, personally), their point was noted seriously by health and psychiatrists alike - and they all came to the same conclusion to allow the procedures to take place.
If that is the case, then your argument about the rights of limbs is superfluous - there are none.
🙂
skunk
macrumors G4
Valid counter-arguments, on the whole. BUT (there's always a but) very difficult questions may still arise about rights and relationships: if two or more clones are created from one original person, for instance. And is a clone of a person a sibling or a child? At some point these questions will have to be addressed.
Maybe not here, though 🙂
Maybe not here, though 🙂
i don't agree with cloning for any purposes other than medical, in which case i think it is ok only if medical testing is done on it within the 1st trimester, and afterwards it is killed (if not already so from the testing). Having multiple people that are exactly the same could cause problems. I don't agree with cloning for the military or religion.