Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Eagler on August 08, 2001, 01:36:00 PM
-
This is from the same idjit that came to prominence by helping 62-year-old woman have a child in 1994. Did anyone do the math b4 hand - the child reaches 18 when she is 80! Just a slight generation gap there :)
I really like this quote:
``We have the techniques we need. We will never allow a deformed child to be born,'' Severino Antinori said.
what? oops she has 12 fingers, try again...
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/nm/20010806/sc/health_italy_cloning_dc_4.html (http://dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/nm/20010806/sc/health_italy_cloning_dc_4.html)
I think he's more interested in the glory than the good...
(http://www.ladyofthecake.com/mel/frank/images/two.jpg)
-
Since 150 years ago everyone knows that travelling at enormous speed of 25 miles per hour is extremely dangerous to human health.
-
the genie's out of the bottle. laws won't stop cloning, nothing will. it will either happen regulated by our government or supported by some other government. it's a matter of time, they'll clone a human if they haven't already.
who cares anyway it'd just be another person. people are also the sum of their experiences not just their genes. if you don't want your kid's genes messed with then don't do it! no one will make a law saying you have to be cloned ya know. the paranoid types will say the slippery slope leads to this but come on.... i don't get the fury???
[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: mrfish ]
-
Aw heck, we need the clones for research. I for one am very interested to know how cancer will affect a babies brain. I would also like to know the effects of radiation on a fetus. This could be very valuable info for the legitimately conceived humans, especially if the mother is exposed to radiation.
When your done with the fetus, just chop it's head off and throw it in the waste basket. Better yet, feed the millions of starving people all across out wonderful world.
Imagine that, FREE food. I do believe I've just solved world hunger.
-
Eagler,
That 62-year old woman could probably count no worse then you did. I could name you any number of reasons why she could want to have a baby. None of them concern anyone but herself and her physician.
fscott,
All the arguments about clones that you presented are as valid with "clones" replaced by "babies".
All the abuse that can be done to clones can be done to the normally produced babies/fetuses - including feeding them to the starving people or doing experimants.
That would be bad reason for outlawing procreation.
In fact, most people that intend to produce a clone plan to love and cherish him/her, not use for barbeque.
There may be quite beneficial applications to cloning. Look how popular and beloved the former president Clinton is, despite some admitted lack of moral judgement on his part. Unfortunately we cannot reelect him for the third term.
If you produce a set of clones from him, you could legally have a Mr. Clinton as a president forever. Even better then the original one because the parents would know what to watch for during the upbringing... :)
miko
-
The same laws the prohibit testing with babies and fetuses also apply to cloned ones.
You idiot.
-
<deep and meaningful mode on>
The human race has defied the laws of nature for some time now. Our ability to use technology to beat diseases, illnesses and other things that are used by natural selection to thin out and improve the species has come to a peak.
When we swung from the trees natural selection was the drive force in our evolution. Dumb salamanders like the FDPs were culled by big arsed sabre-tooth sheep. Now that is gone. How can we evolve going forward? How do we a prevent a de-evolution caused by the survival of inbred idiots like creamo who would normally be cat food by now?
Easy, genetics and cloning are the first steps.
People don't realise we have in fact been pissing around with genetics for a long time now. Look at veges, dogs, cats, chooks, cows, all those domesticated animals. We've been tinkering with their bloodlines for ages now. Flower-freaks have been doing weird toejam with orchids for ages.
The anti-GE anti-Cloning crowd are the flat-earthers of our age. GE and cloning is the way forward. BUT it does need to be managed. If our species is to evolve from here we have no other choice.
<rant off>
pass the beer... think of it boys - no more flat-chested chicks!
[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: Vulcan ]
-
the earth is flat, i have a National Geographic map to prove it
-
It seems (Animal) have missed the sarcasm in my post.
The question I pose is why is it wrong to test and do research on a cloned fetus, if it is OK to kill fetuses that are still in the mother's womb?
We have no problem slicing and dicing living breathing fetuses while they live inside the womb, yet we are all against doing research on a cloned fetus? ROFL!
!
-
Cloning scares the crap out of me. Like everything, it has the potential to be truly great, but it also has the potential to be fatal.
2 bycicle shop geeks make a stupid glider fly a few dozen feet. Less than a dozen years later you have the Sopwith Camel, the Spad and the Fokker Eindecker. Less than 30 years after that you have P-51's B17s, Bf109G10's.
How wonderful it wouldve been if it had been used for some other purpose than war?
oooh.. we cloned a pathetic corn plant. Hey, look, those 2 sheep look alike! Hi dolly! OMHFG those 10 armed guards are strikingly similar!
History repeats itself. Always.
So sorry, even if I knew for certain that cloning held the cure for all world hunger, disease and extend life, I wouldnt take it JUST for the fact of its other potentials. The scale is not balanced in my book. NEXT!
-
Originally posted by fscott:
It seems (Animal) have missed the sarcasm in my post.
The question I pose is why is it wrong to test and do research on a cloned fetus, if it is OK to kill fetuses that are still in the mother's womb?
We have no problem slicing and dicing living breathing fetuses while they live inside the womb, yet we are all against doing research on a cloned fetus? ROFL!
!
yep, that's me issue exactly. A fetus is not a crop or sheep...
What do we do with the "almost got it right" 's ?? Or the mentally retarded we create while playing God? Use them for parts??
Seems self serving....
-
Originally posted by Eagler:
Seems self serving....
Please excuse my ignorance but may I Ask WHAT HAS MANKIND EVER DONE THAT WAS NOT SELFSERVING TO SOMEONE/GROUP?
-
how about we grind them up and make solyient green?
-
If stem cell research leads to cures for Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's I'm all for it. The avenues of exploration are unbounded.
There is no god, so I have no problem with man having a shot at the job. Afterall, we've been altering our environments, both physically and genetically for thousands of years. Now we have the tools to do it more directly.
-
I think its Man`s greatests mistake,to think
he can dominate Mother nature,she will beat us everytime,,,,,,,,,,,,in time ;)
Dawvgrid
-
The problem with cloning at the moment is the huge number of tries needed to actually succeed.
Dolly the sheep took 247 tries, and even then she's far too big compared to other sheep of the same race.
The cloning methodology hasn't changed - the results will be the same.
I'm with the mainstream scientists here - safety concerns alone is enough to postpone human cloning for some years. I won't go into the ethical/moral debate yet, as there is no need to (safety make them needless).
What we have are a couple of guys wanting to be immortal by cloning the first human. Thirst for glory. A common factor that has lead men and women astray in the past.
-
Originally posted by StSanta:
The problem with cloning at the moment is the huge number of tries needed to actually succeed.
Dolly the sheep took 247 tries, and even then she's far too big compared to other sheep of the same race.
The cloning methodology hasn't changed - the results will be the same.
I'm with the mainstream scientists here - safety concerns alone is enough to postpone human cloning for some years. I won't go into the ethical/moral debate yet, as there is no need to (safety make them needless).
What we have are a couple of guys wanting to be immortal by cloning the first human. Thirst for glory. A common factor that has lead men and women astray in the past.
very scary when I start agreeing with StSanta :)
let me rephrase "self serving for a select few"
right now it's the Italian "doctor" who wants to be first...
if/when they get it right, it'll be the Hollywood/Bill Gates types as they will be the only ones who can afford it. Image half a dozen Alec Baldwins running around the place, that's enough for me to scrape the whole idea :)
pssst - Dowding, my English liberal friend, ur wrong about that one bud = "no god", bet u a Curly Wurly :)
-
ppssst eagler ... your god might not be his .. nor mine .. nore anyone elses it's your belife and telling him his is wrong has been done before just read back in your history books
-
Originally posted by Duckwing6:
ppssst eagler ... your god might not be his .. nor mine .. nore anyone elses it's your belife and telling him his is wrong has been done before just read back in your history books
Dwing, I'll bet you too, prob is I won't be there to collect when you find out :)
-
We're already over-populating the planet, why in the hell would we want to do it at an even faster rate?
-SW
-
Originally posted by SWulfe:
We're already over-populating the planet, why in the hell would we want to do it at an even faster rate?
-SW
Yep and it seems to be the same group who are screaming to keep their "right to choose" that now want this as a viable option of reproduction....go figure. Can't say I'm not curious about the whole thing, just wonder if the public will even beware of the the "almost" clones or are they just gonna be quietly flushed away ....
-
Originally posted by Eagler:
let me rephrase "self serving for a select few"
right now it's the Italian "doctor" who wants to be first...
if/when they get it right, it'll be the Hollywood/Bill Gates types as they will be the only ones who can afford it. Image half a dozen Alec Baldwins running around the place, that's enough for me to scrape the whole idea :)
Ok the Italian Dr., Hollywood, Bill Gates, Is this not someone/group?
Whether it is or is not that does not invalidate my question. (sorry for the caps). I actually thought about this after I posted. I could not come up with anything mankind has done that was not self-serving, can you? :) Yes, I am being argumentative and stirring the pot. :)
Think of the multitudes that have died in the name of progress over the span of mankind's run on this earth. (Heck just look at the automobile and the carnage it continues to wreak). In truth I have not "come down" on either side of the issue yet (cloning) but I sure would like to see the genealogist's get the cancer gene isolated and be able to "fix" that problem in afflicted fetus.
pssst - Dowding, my English liberal friend, ur wrong about that one bud = "no god", bet u a Curly Wurly :)
Agree with this one, now if we could just get rid if religion. :D
-
Originally posted by Eagler:
Yep and it seems to be the same group who are screaming to keep their "right to choose" that now want this as a viable option of reproduction....go figure. Can't say I'm not curious about the whole thing, just wonder if the public will even beware of the the "almost" clones or are they just gonna be quietly flushed away ....
That's because you insist on seeing pro-choice as pro-abortion. These are not the same thing.
-
Leave the "pro-choice"/"Pro-life" thing out of it. Leave your God out of it. Leave your religion out of it.
Lets deal with it as it is.. a genetical engineering science.
What are the pros? What are the cons?
Do you approve of genetical engineering (cloning) on animals?
If you do, then you have no room to be against it for humans.
Me? I think dickin' around with nature is going to f*ck us all in the end.
But that's just me.
-SW
-
Originally posted by SWulfe:
Leave the "pro-choice"/"Pro-life" thing out of it. Leave your God out of it. Leave your religion out of it.
Lets deal with it as it is.. a genetical engineering science.
What are the pros? What are the cons?
Do you approve of genetical engineering (cloning) on animals?
If you do, then you have no room to be against it for humans.
Me? I think dickin' around with nature is going to f*ck us all in the end.
But that's just me.
-SW
Don't quite get this one..
It's all about life, which if one beliefs in God, is the same thing.
I can eat beef from a mentally retarded cow, don't think a cloning "oops" who is born short a full load is the same thing.
Agree with messing with mo nature, big mistake - if not now, it'll be later..
-
Originally posted by SWulfe:
Me? I think dickin' around with nature is going to f*ck us all in the end.
That all "dickin' around with nature" started when we harnessed a horse and plowed the medow instead of scavenging for fallen fruit, roots and berries. Who knew.
Should have also thought twice about screwing around with that fire thingy...
Beer was a good invention though. Some say the wheel is more important, but wheel with salted fish is not as satisfying... ;)
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d:
That all "dickin' around with nature" started when we harnessed a horse and plowed the medow instead of scavenging for fallen fruit, roots and berries. Who knew.
Should have also thought twice about screwing around with that fire thingy...
Beer was a good invention though. Some say the wheel is more important, but wheel with salted fish is not as satisfying... ;)
Perfect example of going to the extremes.
Nevermind, not worth arguing with someone who will go to extremes to prove something.
Eagler: Too many religions, they all go against each other.. what's the point of using one as a stepping stone?
-SW
-
Originally posted by SwampRat:
Unfortunately? Oh you are just SICK!!
Swamp
:mad:
Didn't you see that smiley face thingy at the end of the paragraph? It's called sarcasm - the meaning is opposite to the literal statement.
Seriously, clone so charmingly cute and lovable personality as Clinton and raise him as a moral upstanding citizen, preferably republican.
Then he probably would not want to be a president, though...
If he did, we would not have those presidential scandals anymore.
Did I have sex with that intern in the Oval Office?
It depends on the definition what "I" is.
;) ;) ;)
miko
-
Originally posted by SWulfe:
Perfect example of going to the extremes.
Nevermind, not worth arguing with someone who will go to extremes to prove something.
Seriously, I dislike the idea of cloning as much as I dislike the idea of violence or waste.
But I dislike even more when the state bureacracy gets involved in decision what is good for us.
If I had some God-like miraculous and innoticeable way to make cloning research impossible without state intervention, I would do it.
But then I would also make impossible any medical research outside straight surgery/traumatology.
I believe in natural selection/God's will as a way to have healthy humans.
I perceive the human progress in acquiring knowlege as just another law of nature. There is nothing that could be done about it. We would better spend our energy discussing/arguing how we live with it.
miko
-
I SAY WE CLONE ALL THE GUYS AT HTC SO THEY GET 1.08 DONE FASTER :)
-
Originally posted by Eagler:
Don't quite get this one..
It's all about life, which if one beliefs in God, is the same thing.
..
no science booted god when they found out he insisted that everything else went round the earth. his credibility was kinda shot.
in mexico many families are afraid to use birth control because the pope, from his golden throne, told them they'd go to hell. it is ok, however to have 7 kids and live in poverty of course. well you need just enough money to buy little virgin mary statues from the pope for his fat wallet but not to feed yourself.
science blossomed once religion got tossed so stay out.
-
Yeah, I can't believe Lucas is titling his next Star Wars movie "Attack of the Clones"!!! Come on, how pathetic is that??? wait a second... that's what we're talking about right? :D
sorry!!! couldn't resist!!! ;)
-
so true Mr.Fish...
oh btw.. the battlejell of the crusaders was "for god" ... go figure
[ 08-10-2001: Message edited by: Duckwing6 ]
-
lol Eagler. :D
I believe our definitions of 'god' differ too widely for me to take that bet. Perhaps I should have said 'There is no god as described by every Faith I have ever studied'.
IMO; goes without saying, I don't have some supernatural insight into these things. Which is a shame. ;)
-
Miko: "Did I have sex with that intern in the Oval Office?
It depends on the definition what "I" is."
Lol good one. :D