Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But what if it doesn't have to be? I'm okay with rich people paying huge money to clone stuff because I think they're funding research that could help humans. Maybe they won't ever figure out how to make us live forever or produce clones that are exactly the same including thoughts and memories of the original. But I think they must be learning a lot about the human body and how it is formed, and I think that will help us in the future to have better medical care and better quality for the life we do live.
Don't get me wrong, young grasshopper, but I shudder at the thought of financial science being able to mass produce me and whatever their copy of my thoughts and memories inserted inside.
To defeat death is to forgo God's judgement. If we can live forever without God's judgement, we may feel no need to be with God. If the definition of hell is to outside of God's love, and if a clone does not have a soul....then a series of clones would only have each other, but without the restraint of God.
Less spiritually, if you think people can claw each other for financial gain today, imagine how they would do it knowing they needed to survive for a millennia or more. Working for a bad boss for 45 years is a long time. 450 years....
No, either humankind needs to greatly step-up, or I'd much rather return to my maker.
But what if it doesn't have to be? I'm okay with rich people paying huge money to clone stuff because I think they're funding research that could help humans. Maybe they won't ever figure out how to make us live forever or produce clones that are exactly the same including thoughts and memories of the original. But I think they must be learning a lot about the human body and how it is formed, and I think that will help us in the future to have better medical care and better quality for the life we do live.
If cloning meant that death was not a part of a natural life?? Well you would not be living a natural life if death were not a part of it. It would be a man made life. Death is as much a part of life as birth and I think lots of people just need to learn to accept it as such. I myself believe this human life is just part of my souls journey and am fine with the concept of death. Sure those loved ones left behind ( for the time being) suffer pain at a loss but that too is life. I have lost dogs, both my parents a young niece and countless other relatives and friends and you know what the world did not end like some people seem to think it will at a death of a loved one. I got up the next day and life went on. Yeah I miss those I have lost but I have memories that will carry me through life and new adventures to live. Sad as it is that is life.
No! With so many good dogs desperately needing home in shelters, no way!
I would be devastated to loose my Keira, but I rescued her from abuse and neglect, the best way to honor her, would be to rescue another dog from the same fate!
If I owned Secretariat, a clone migh be worth a try.
Secretariat probably wouldn't be worth cloning, as he actually had a long stud career as it is, and any clones of him wouldn't be registerable by the Jockey Club because they would not be a product of live cover (so the clones' offspring couldn't race). But at least one famous Thoroughbred jumper HAS been cloned, because he was gelded before his jumping career started and so could not be bred, and no one in the jumper world cares overmuch about Jockey Club registration (although they do care about pedigree).
But it does seem silly to clone pets (as opposed to performance animals), since nearly all dogs and cats are capable of giving affection. I'd certainly rather give another needy animal a chance at a new life than make a copy of my deceased one (which won't be an exact replica anyway).
No. I think there would be problems, something would end up becoming weak, impaired and wrong about the clone.
I know it isn't the same thing but I've been cloning plants for 45 years and have been observing the habits of plant clones for all that time. I've found that even with clones that have come from the most exceptionally healthy and superior donor plants the clones are more likely to have weaker immune systems and will end up with something wrong or out of whack with them that gets worse as they age. It can be some weakness or flaw or disease that shows up in early "adulthood" of the clone, something undesirable/detrimental that was never evident in the donor plant and then becomes more pronounced as the clone ages. Sometimes a clone may be strong and healthy one day and the following day it keels over dead for no apparent reason.
Also, in terms of life-span I've found that all clones, even exceptionally healthy clones with no apparent weakness, don't produce strong natural (non-cloned) offspring and they don't live as long as the naturally grown donor plants that they come from. Theoretically it shouldn't be that way, but it is, and if that is what happens with plant clones then why shouldn't it be expected with animal clones?
It's like taking a photocopy of a photocopy, etc. - each copy is always weaker and has more flaws than the original did, and likewise the technique hasn't been perfected yet to create an identical and perfect clone without flaws that will impair it and shorten its life span.
.
It's too soon to tell whether cloned dogs will reflect genetic weaknesses. Snuppy, the world's first cloned dog, died in 2015 at the age of 10; I don't know what the cause of death was. He sired nine pups out of two cloned ******* in 2008. There have been other dogs and wolves cloned since Snuppy's birth in 2005; I don't know how they are doing. So far, what information I have found about Snuppy and his offspring does not indicate any particular weakness or strength. I would wonder why he was not able to, or allowed to, sire his pups in the natural way; if it was a reproductive problem or merely his caretakers not wanting to risk any harm to Snuppy during the breeding process (sometimes a natural breeding goes smoothly, sometimes it doesn't). I'm not sure what the early death of the other clone, born of the same process and genes as Snuppy, at two weeks of age, indicates.
It would be interesting to have more data on the health and vitality of the hundreds of cloned dogs and cats as they age...
I could see cloning rare animals that were on the verge of extinction. But as much as I love my dogs and cats, there's no way I would clone any of them. The older I get, the more I take comfort in the "circle of life" and knowing that we have a beginning and an ending here on earth.
However, I will admit I've had some illogical pangs of regret when I've had pets neutered or spayed because it shuts the door to having some part of them live on after they're gone. But that's not rational and it never stops me from doing what's best for them.
Secretariat probably wouldn't be worth cloning, as he actually had a long stud career as it is, and any clones of him wouldn't be registerable by the Jockey Club<>
But it does seem silly to clone pets (as opposed to performance animals), since nearly all dogs and cats are capable of giving affection. I'd certainly rather give another needy animal a chance at a new life than make a copy of my deceased one (which won't be an exact replica anyway).
All valid. My reason for wanting to clone our current pet is she is a mixed breed rescue pup and she was spayed so there is no other possibility of getting close to her appearance. I realize the personality is a result of her environment, too.
All valid. My reason for wanting to clone our current pet is she is a mixed breed rescue pup and she was spayed so there is no other possibility of getting close to her appearance. I realize the personality is a result of her environment, too.
There are a lot of unique beautiful mixed breed dogs out there so why is it so important to have a dog that looks exactly like a previous one? I would think that would make you think and compare it to the previous dog more then loving it for the individual dog it is. I have had 6 dogs so far as an adult and one my late Jazz was my once in a life time dog. That being said I still would not have cloned her as there was only 1 Jazz and to have another dog that looked exactly like her would not make it her. The dogs I have now look nothing like Jazz or any of my previous dogs they are two new individuals with their own looks. And once again they are two beautiful looking dogs. It is good to try something new rather then stick with the same thing over and over. Jazz will live on forever in my heart and memories as it should be.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
