T-Rex Cloning ...

Discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users.
Forum rules
General Discussion is a bonus forum for discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users. All site rules apply.
bennyb
Registered User
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: on the hop

Post by bennyb »

Just clone Pamela Anderson instead, here's my $100 but I won't wait 3 months in line for it :)

Magnotta
Former Team Member
Posts: 1093
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:16 am
Location: Ontario

Post by Magnotta »

T1Cybernetic wrote: When you are dying /dead wouldnt you like for them to freeze you or part
of you so that you could be cloned in say like 2000 years or something?


If they clone you in the future though, you yourself will not be the one living there. It's not like you can just die now, get cloned in 2000 years, and be like "ahhh, I'm back to life." The clone would be an entirely new person, just genetically identical to you, so frankly I don't see why anyone would care to have themselves cloned, as it doesn't extend your life in any way.

tOnk3r
Registered User
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 1:00 am
Location: London
Contact:

Post by tOnk3r »

People will do it for the same reasons they have children.
While when we have children half of our genes get passed on (this is why people feel the need to have children), when we get cloned it will be an identical copy. So theoretically people would want to be cloned more than they would wan to have children.

Its just a basic animal instinct to pass on out genetics and traits.

Magnotta
Former Team Member
Posts: 1093
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:16 am
Location: Ontario

Post by Magnotta »

tOnk3r wrote: People will do it for the same reasons they have children.
While when we have children half of our genes get passed on (this is why people feel the need to have children), when we get cloned it will be an identical copy. So theoretically people would want to be cloned more than they would wan to have children.


I don't think it would necessarily make people want a clone more than kids. It might of course if someone is single, but I don't see how any couple would agree to a cloned kid, as it essentially is killing off one of the 2 bloodlines, and saying to your partner/spouse "well, I don't want my kid to be like you at all, so lets avoid your genes". I'm pretty sure no self-respecting person would actually go along with that. That said, single people would wanting a kid would probabaly jump at the chance.

User avatar
lazzybugger
Registered User
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 10:56 am

Post by lazzybugger »

i wouldnt because would u let a dinarsour run around the place?

Magnotta
Former Team Member
Posts: 1093
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:16 am
Location: Ontario

Post by Magnotta »

lazzybugger wrote: i wouldnt because would u let a dinarsour run around the place?


.....the thing won't be running around the place. I mean, there are lions and tigers(and bears, oh my) in zoo's all around the place, does that mean they are wandering up and down your streets?(well, in some places you might actually have a bear walking down the street, but that depends on your exact location).

User avatar
lazzybugger
Registered User
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 10:56 am

Post by lazzybugger »

Magnotta wrote: ......but that depends on your exact location).


ill live on the moon, if u dont mind. if they clone a T-rex. lmao

tOnk3r
Registered User
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 1:00 am
Location: London
Contact:

Post by tOnk3r »

People get into relationships (instinctually) for the breeding part of it. I know "emotions" and crap come into it, but human instinct makes us want a monogemous relationship because it provides us with the oportunity to breed, and the breeding means half of our genetic material gets passed on.
Should cloning be possible people might not even want to be in relationships anymore. Why get into a relationship to pass on half of our genes when cloning on our own means we pass on all of our genes.

Wide spread human cloning would change the way people think in a big way. It would be the biggest thing in the history of manking with regards from seperating us from animals.

Canis_Latrans
Registered User
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2002 4:42 am

Post by Canis_Latrans »

tOnk3r wrote: Why get into a relationship to pass on half of our genes when cloning on our own means we pass on all of our genes.


Because there's more to having sex than just making babies if you know what I mean...

User avatar
MHobbit
Former Team Member
Posts: 4761
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: There and Back Again

Post by MHobbit »

Canis_Latrans wrote: Because there's more to having sex than just making babies if you know what I mean...


Indeed.
Former phpBB MOD Team member
No private support is offered.
"There’s too many things to get done, and I’m running out of days..."

tOnk3r
Registered User
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 1:00 am
Location: London
Contact:

Post by tOnk3r »

Because there's more to having sex than just making babies if you know what I mean...

But there isnt. Thats my point.

Yeah, people like having sex, but we only like it because our instincts tell us it makes babies, and having babies means our genes get passed on.

We are just animals. We have sex for the same reason any animal has sex. Human cloning would drasticly change the way we see it. Having sex (producing babies) wouldnt be the best way to pass out genes on anymore so it would change the way we think about it.

bennyb
Registered User
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: on the hop

Post by bennyb »

tOnk3r wrote: Yeah, people like having sex, but we only like it because our instincts tell us it makes babies ...

I wonder if the gay and lesbian community would agree with you on these instincts? Im not gay or lesbian, but I think there might be one or two out there who like sex too... :wink:

As for the dinosaurs, are they just gonna inject an egg or what? I don't want my t rex having stepmother issues...

tOnk3r
Registered User
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 1:00 am
Location: London
Contact:

Post by tOnk3r »

So we throw human nature and animal instict out the window because a few people like to have relationships with other people of the same sex?
go figure. :roll:

Hetrosexual sex and homosexual sex, in my opinion, are two very different things done for very different reasons. Homosexuality is as valid as beasiality as an actual sexuality, its more of a fetish. We could get into all of that, and i can explain why lesbians do what they do and why homosexual men do what they do, but its kind of moving away from the point.

I dont think anybody would disagree that our need to reproduce and pass on our genes is completely instinctual, and that relationships and sexuality have a basis in our need to reproduce. They are all linked very closely.
And should cloning become widespread with humans it would drasticly change the way we think about sex , reproduction, relationships and our own genealogy.

Darth Wong
Registered User
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2002 5:20 am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

tOnk3r wrote:
Because there's more to having sex than just making babies if you know what I mean...

But there isnt. Thats my point.

What you don't understand is that the original evolutionary driving force is external to ourselves, not hardwired into our psyche. In short, we instinctively desire to have sex because only species variants with that instinct would propagate their genetic material. However, that does not mean propagation of our genetic material is also an instinct. Why do you think people often adopt children? There is absolutely no genetic imperative to adopt children, yet once we have adopted a child, we love that child as our own.
Yeah, people like having sex, but we only like it because our instincts tell us it makes babies, and having babies means our genes get passed on.

Wrong. People like to have sex because their instincts tell them to. Their instincts tell them nothing about genetics. A person who is sterile or who has had a vasectomy still has just as much desire to have sex even though he knows it will not propagate his genetic material.
We are just animals. We have sex for the same reason any animal has sex. Human cloning would drasticly change the way we see it. Having sex (producing babies) wouldnt be the best way to pass out genes on anymore so it would change the way we think about it.

Nonsense. By this reasoning, people would not desire sex if they had to use contraceptives.
Not a three-foot tall green gnome in real-life: My home page.
My wretched hive of scum and villainy: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/

Magnotta
Former Team Member
Posts: 1093
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:16 am
Location: Ontario

Post by Magnotta »

tOnk3r wrote: So we throw human nature and animal instict out the window because a few people like to have relationships with other people of the same sex?
go figure. :roll:


Ahhh good point, because there are so few gay people in the world....
Hetrosexual sex and homosexual sex, in my opinion, are two very different things done for very different reasons. Homosexuality is as valid as beasiality as an actual sexuality, its more of a fetish.


I will really hope for your sake that no one on this board who might be gay reads your post there, as I'm sure you've probabaly offended them to the point of calling for your head. Calling being gay and being into sex with animals is really crossing the line and a completely ignorant view I'd say. However, at the same time you get so offended when a few pople call priests pedophiles....
I dont think anybody would disagree that our need to reproduce and pass on our genes is completely instinctual, and that relationships and sexuality have a basis in our need to reproduce. They are all linked very closely.
And should cloning become widespread with humans it would drasticly change the way we think about sex , reproduction, relationships and our own genealogy.


It would not change the way people thing about relationships and sex. People will stay in relationships for loving companionship. If it was just to reproduce then we would be just like all the animals that look for a partner during mating season. That's why people who are sterile will still be in a relationship, even though they won't be passing on any genes. That's why a couple who can't concieve will adopt a child yet STILL stay together and not get divorced. People also have sex because they like sex. If people only had sex to make a baby, condomn sales would be non-existant. If we could suddenly clone ourselves, and people decided more so that they would prefer a clone instead of a baby, people would still have just as much sex, only difference is birth control would be used even more.

Locked

Return to “General Discussion”