It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fight to clone a human.

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Spock Shock
and after all that they can clone my wife while their at it, oh yeeee

Wouldn't you prefer them to clone someone else's wife for you instead?

We've still got a long way to go before we reach the stage where we can clone people, like Ripley in Alien 4.




posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 11:45 PM
link   
If this isn't done in a country like Australia, it will be done in a country like China or India with less or no standards. I think we should be proud of the fact that if we do it first it will be held accountable to higher standards.

Also, it's not like they're cloning a whole human (they will one day), just a bunch of cells. Anyway, I thought they found a way to clone stem cells without using embryos, from hair follicles or something.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Cthulwho
That was my point, that they don't have to kill embryos in order to do the research. Adult stem cells carry no controversy with them and have been proven to be much, much more effective. They're also cheaper to produce.

I'm all for the research. I just don't understand why the scientists involved are so gung-ho about killing something (someone) to get them. If they were killing laboratory rats instead of human embryos, the ASPCA and PETA would be screaming bloody murder.

What a world...

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 10:21 AM
link   
I say let them clone them, afterall we're talking about a bunch of cells not a human being here. Theres a quote either in the bible or from one of the popes that went along the lines of "Life is in the blood". That to me sounds like once blood is infused into a fetus then it counts as being alive.

What they are proposing is a small bunch of cells, a translucent sack of genetic material, a loose association of disorganised activity, it's not a human life or a human being.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

From the original article, www.news.com.au... :

The embryos are created by fusing spare, unfertilised IVF eggs with genetic material -- a normal or diseased skin cell, for example, -- from another person.

The cloned embryos would be destroyed once stem cells had been collected or before the embryos reached 14 days old.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

(emphasis mine)

They're talking about embryos, not loose groups of cells. Loose groups of cells would make me stop and think twice before condemning the practice. But embryos are a stage in the development of a human child, and as such, have the ability to develop into an adult human if not 'destroyed'.

You and I were both embryos at some point.

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


You and I were both two seperate cells at one time, are we to say a single cell is a human being? I think not, and by loose association of cells i was quite correct. Although the cells are going about their pre determined program, they are still a clump of cells that look nothing like a human being. Below is linked an image to an embryo between the ages of 8-14 days.




That has the potential to be a human being, but it is not an actual, breathing, thinking human person, it is a clump of cells and nothing more.

Lets also rememebr that if the researchers hadn't put these two cells together then they wouldn't even exist, it's not like these cells were ever going to become a life. Are you aware the amount of times women get naturally pregnant and naturally abort the embyro before the first 12 days? They are very common and so i see little difference.

We are not terminating a human being, this bunch of cells can't think and so we're just killing some cells, it's like arguing the difference between disinfecting a kitchen counter and killing a real life human person.

[edit on 8-6-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Then people with enough money can get clones of themselves, like Michael Jackson, except his clone won't look like him. Presidential clones. Probably the Saddam executed was a clone. I bet there is already clones running around. I'd like to have one and I'd let it go to work for me.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Who decides what is right?

This is why people forcing their moralities on others holds us back as a society. We can learn tons from actually cloning people, yet some people are just into forcing their moralities on others, or using their views of ethics to stop our advancements from this.

I say clone away, and learn how things like this can benefit the rest of humanity.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Fight to clone a human -Kind of a misleading title don't you think?

Shoulda' been 'Fight to Clone a Human Stem Cell '

[edit on 6/8/2008 by jkrog08]



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


That's the point isn't it, this isn't a baby it's a clump of cells for gods sake! Oh and yes i used gods name on purpose, blasphemy is lovely sometimes. View the pictur ei posted above, that's a "baby" at 14 days. Nothing more than a loose association of cells, trying to find where they should be according to a genetic blueprint we think is coordinated by chemical signals. It's not a baby, it doesn't look human, it's like a cloud of spores, a culture of bacteria and nothing more than either of those two things.

Just because it has the potential to be a human doesn't mean it is human.

I'm really tired and quite concerned that science is being help back so much. It's time we abandoned the religous principles that are causing these setbacks. Whilst i agree with morals being included in science so that scientists are not allowed to disect living concious human beings, those morals shoudln't stop all scientific progress. Bushes veto on stem cell research alone held the field back several years in research time.

[edit on 8-6-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
Fight to clone a human -Kind of a misleading title don't you think?
Shoulda' been 'Fight to Clone a Human Stem Cell '

Don't blame me, that's the title of the news source link.

Blame them instead.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


Awesome post,totally agree 'moral' standards are destroying science,but when it comes to torturing prisoners we don't seem to care!!?

To the OP:I know I was just giving you a hard time,lol.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


I hope they approve this and it becomes a reality. Hopefully this will lead to advanced cloning and genetic manipulation to create a superior race. Face it humanity is on edge and is still very primitive. We have all been mutated by viruses and medicines. The future will be clean and perfect. The biggest problem human cloning will face is sterilizing this filthy world.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by WISHADOW
reply to post by tezzajw
 


I hope they approve this and it becomes a reality. Hopefully this will lead to advanced cloning and genetic manipulation to create a superior race. Face it humanity is on edge and is still very primitive. We have all been mutated by viruses and medicines. The future will be clean and perfect. The biggest problem human cloning will face is sterilizing this filthy world.


Superior race? Whilst i thin using genetic technology to improve the next generation is a good thing, we have to be VERY careful about superior races. Check out the film "gataca" for a very good view of it.

Viruses don't truly mutates us, they damage us, however our bodies adapt and in the long run we often develop stronger immune systems because of these adaptations, medicines also don't mutate our genes.

The future will not be clean, viruses and bacteria will also mutate ahead of our technology simply because they are able to have multiple generations in a few hours, promoting the chances of advantagous mutation.

Sterilizing this world? What did that mean?



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 10:54 PM
link   
I read somewhere that in the UK, the scientists want to creat chimeras. Half human, half animal. Bad idea. Plus, with the human clones, what rights will they have? Will they be property? Because you know the scientists next step will to be to let them get mature so they can see how their little experiment turned out. It's a bad idea and they probably already are trying it.



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 06:09 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Aren't the unused embryos destroyed anyway? I don't see why we shouldn't get some use out of them, rather than just tossing them into the incinerator.

As far as cloning goes, I see no problems there. If it benefits mankind as a whole, and not just the ruling class then I think it's great. Military applications will naturally follow, but that's inevitable.

[edit on 9-6-2008 by Kranil]


sty

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 07:11 AM
link   
It is nothing more than COPY+PASTE . We should wait bit more I guess, as we do not fully understand how DNA/RNA actually works..



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 09:04 AM
link   
The irony of this all is we are battling overpopulation in some countries. We are heading for a world where there will not be enough food for the masses.

We hand out birth control to the masses in underprivileged countries and here we want to produce human in a lab. hmmmm... what's next?



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
I don't want this to turn into an abortion/pro-life debate, so on that point we'll just have to disagree. As the father of one miscarried 'fetus', I know that the thing was a child, but there is no way I can scientifically 'prove' that to you.

The point I am arguing is that there are no advantages to using embryonic stem cells over adult stem cells. There are definite advantages to using adult stem cells over embryonic stem cells. So why are we even bringing up this debate over a technology that is shown by medical research to be inferior in stem cell research?

A few links for you to read on:
www.21stcenturysciencetech.com...
stemcells.nih.gov...
www.stemcellresearchfacts.com...

I am very familiar with the reproductive system of humans, and yes, you are correct in your assertions concerning such. The point you make is moot to this discussion, however, since the concept of abortion rights is not part of my argument. The fact that a less controversial, more advanced, more promising, and cheaper method of producing what I agree is much needed research material is not only available but regularly used my medical research exists, and therefore renders this experiment both unneeded and undesirable.

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


I read your links however i've heard several scientists say that embryonic stem cells have different effects than adult ones. Studying both seems to be the best course until we fully understand both. However i don't think there is a problem in studying embryonic stem cells, i'm sorry but to me it is not a life. It is never going to be a life, it's never going beyond 14 days, it's a small collection of cells not a human being and so i think it's perfectly acceptable to study it.

Lets put it this way, if my sperm were used to create some of these embryos then i simply wouldn't care, they are not children, they are embryos outside a womb that were never going to be children and would have been dumped into an incinerator. May as well get some use out of them.

the third of your links was the most interesting to me, showing that both adult and embryonic stem cells have their own advantages and disadvantages. Scientsits wouldn't be using the embryonic ones unless they had to, if the adult ones were just as good and cheaper then they would use them. However quantities are hard to come by with adult cells and most interestingly of all, it says as i thought, that adult stem cells tend to be more difficult to program into other tissue types.

So for now at least we have to explore both avenues, i don't like morals about a bunch of cells standing in the way of scientific progress.

[edit on 9-6-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join