In future a man – animal will be create in England .
Cloning of the people is forbidden all over the world.
………… But the British government is going to permit its
scientists to create hybrid ……man - animal.
If this crossing passes successfully……… it will be
used for treatment of illness….… and traumas of a spinal cord.
…The sociological interrogation testify …
the inhabitants of Britain generally do not object to realization
of such experiences.
===== =========…………
My comment.
I think this British decision is connected with:
a) the British inhabitants are afraid of terrorists
so much that they need sphinxes for guard.
b) or maybe, the British establishment bored to ride
horses and they decided to change them into centaurs.
And they found a very good excuse for their decision:
“the cloning man – animal will help to treat peopleâ€.
And so , it will be taken as a scientific progress.
In 1945 the nazi- doctors were considered as criminal
for men’s experiments. Isn’t it the same?
Did the situation really happen by chance?
No. It happened as a result of the development of science.
It happened because paradoxical ideas were put in
the fundament of physics, in the beginning of its appearance.
And now we have a science which is full of paradoxes and
considers that there is nothing Absolute, everything in the
world is relatively. Therefore, we can wait the next logical
decision of the British government: †Maintaining the rights
of the sexual minority………….( or, maybe, …….
…according to the wishes of British inhabitants )….to permit
the wedding between people and centaurs and sphinxes.â€
Signature:
The Prime-minister………………………
The speaker of Parliament……………
Confirm:
Queen / King of Britain. ……………
==============…
I only hope that because the Universe acts by Quantum’s Laws,
so, according to " The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle "
this " logical " situation can be changed.
======== ===========
I would like to read the link, but, it is in a language I am unfamiliar with.
I have no problems with the concept.
The Nazi party did not use volunteer humans… big, huge massive difference. I doubt that the Brits are doing anything remotely close, but, I will wait and reserve that thought until I can read the link in English
It isn’t like the scientific community can make the Island of Dr. Moreu. These would just be hESCs with a gene-or-two from another organism inserted. Nothing too dramatic. Interestingly, one of the predictions of evolutionary theory plays out here, if you combine the nuclei of two different species, the now-aneuploid cell will begin kicking out chromosomes.
I don’t expect they will develop them, there is actually some controversy whether one can even develop a hESC to term (though we can with mouse ESCs). But if we could, so what? I’d like to be able to my my own vitamin C. I lost out on that particular lottery, but my ancestors may not have to.
You must be tired Xunzian. Your ancestors may not have to? LOL Dude if you found that mytholgical way back machine you are going to be stinking wealthy.(Um, I have this charity…)
I was watching the research channel this past weekend. They had talked about combining stem cells from a salamander and a mouse. I missed that part of the lecture Well, the whole lecture series was about stem cell research and what they have found out. It all sounded very promising for our future. If I am not mistaken they are hoping to find out how to use stem cells to regenerate tissues eventually in humans. It will most likely involve other species… If they are proceeding so soon, I am sorry to have missed much of the series. I do hope they replay it.
I heard the CNN report on this. The combination of human e-coli bacteria and frog parts has been done since the 1970s. My question is how can one be certain that development of human (also animal) and animal cellular combos necessitates the sci-fi nightmare Wells envisioned and Xunzian here reminds us of? Couldn’t there also be the possibility that such “tampering” with nature could include scientific investigation ethically involved in understanding and relieving us of gentic diseases? Why should I believe these investigators are “natzi’s”, mad scientists bent on producing life forms that never were just because they can do it, or persons totally oblivious to any lon-ranged implications of their research?
Sorry about that. Confucianism focuses a lot on ancestors so . . . I get confused on that one very easily. Tricky, tricky. Eating my what now?
Yeah, Ierrellus correctly points out that this sort of thing has already been going on for some time now. Different model, same old story. And the world hasn’t ended yet.
I am a resident of England and I am opposed to this hybridation of human-animal, even for research purposes. Firstly, who would want themselves to be an actual blood relation to an animal? Secondly, I’m positive that we have enough technology in this period of time to crate a synthetic man i.e. a computer program that replicates the human defense system against illnesses that affect us.
Why isn’t more research being funded into this, then animal testing would
stop as well. You just can’t extrapolate from animal (or hum-animal) to human. Finally, we shouldn’t be messing around with our own DNA or that of any other species. It’s what makes individual species unique. If those people who are pushing this forward want it so bad, then why not let them use the most efficient method for treating human illnesses… test the humans who want it so badly.
Sorry, dude, but I am the blood relative of an animal. There’s only about a 3% genetic difference between me and a chimp. What religious or other moralistic nonsense leads you to deny natural connection? A resident of England, disrepectful of Darwin? How antideluvian!
You cannot create a replica of that which you do not understand. There are far more unknowns in the murky realms of science than there are knowns. That is why we need animal models, because they help clear up many of these unknowns. Likewise, when the animal model breaks down, we can make some very interesting discoveries. Chimeras help us bridge the gap between these elements, which is key. Your second point is absolutely wrong. Your first point is irrelevant, there is actually some controversy as to whether hESCs can develop normally into human beings. I err on the side of it being possible, but quite difficult. In short, I wouldn’t worry about it. Human cloning is a long ways off and the production of developed Chimeras further still. Though I also wouldn’t have a problem with them being developed when the time comes.
The technology to make hybrid embryos anywhere in the world exists. In the UK, the decision has been made that for the purposes of stem cell research, a few carefully controlled trials are going to be permitted in the hope of finding useful stem cell therapies without the demand for difficult to come by “spare” human eggs.
I don’t think that’s a bad thing.
For one thing, the british trials aren’t going to allow these embryos to mature, and for another since the cell nucleus is replaced, which dictates the proteins made for cell replication. Any viable organism resulting would be to all intents and purposes a fully human clone.
I don’t think human cloning is necessarily a good idea, but that’s not going to spell the end of the world either if it does happen, not least because so much of who and what people are is environmentally determined.
Not my area of expertise, I don’t understand the practical difficulties and barriers in any depth, but I do have difficulty understanding the hysteria (well, OK, if people are reading stuff like the above then maybe it’s just born of misinformation and a tendancy to believe what’s in the papers… but ho hum).
Blood relative to such a creature? Well, I am not xenophobic nor bigoted, I guess as long as it does not try to bite me I will set a place for it at my table, Can’t be worse than my inlaws. I would donate part of me for testing and such. I say get going and find the answers.
Don’t you just love generic words such as “Darwinist” or “progressive” which add nothing to an argument but personal agenda? Which have multiple interpretations, if one cares to find them? Which are used to incite, not to describe?