Britain's first cloned dog!

SalonGeek

Help Support SalonGeek:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Anyone seen the film The Island? It looks like a group of people living in a futuristic world just minding thier own business when in actual fact they were clones of rich people who paid to detain the clones in optimum health and a calm controlled environment in case the rich people needed organs, were infertile n need a surrogate etc etc. It was food for thought. These clones had feelings and thoughts but no human rights because technically there "weren't human" anywho, is that the future? Having a real life insurance policy to euthanise should we needs bits off them? Its an incredible thought but doesnt sit well with me. Cloning animals is interesting but i worry how far this type of power could go and if its morally right? A cute puppy is one thing but what other purpose could cloning a human have?

Sent from my GT-S5830i using SalonGeek mobile app
 
I don't see the point! The dog won't be the same in personality as there would be differences in how they're trained and bought up.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using SalonGeek mobile app

Totally agree.

btw although cloning falls under the umbrella of "bio-chemistry", there is an awful lot more to bio-chemistry than cloning. Cloning is a tiny tiny percentage of what bio-chemistry is all about.

Saying you don't agree with bio chemistry because of cloning is a bit like saying you don't agree with holidays because you don't like Cyprus (or wherever)
 
I just found something that might strengthen my point
Oxford University debate between Dawkins world leading physicist and atheist v Archbishop of Canterbury discussing the beginning, who do you think won, the Archbishop of Canterbury because science has not yet found an answer for Consciousness, language, fight or flight instincts, moral instincts, spiritual energy healing, regression, O.B.E, etc.
I love science and i love spiritualism both, so im not against science, far from it, but i am against bio-chemistry

I can answer these things do were the scientists having a bad day or something? Lol. Fight or flight is easily explained by hormones - adrenaline. Its y birds fly away if something larger approaches. The rest can be theorised using evelution and looking at animal instincts. Animals calling to eachother in the wild to warn, frighten off or choose a mate is how conversation came about. Its communication. Anywho thats just my theory lol.

Sent from my GT-S5830i using SalonGeek mobile app
 
I dont agree with it because I think there are too many dogs out there in need of a good home, also I think you get so much from each different dog you have that to keep having the same one over and over would feel like missing out.
When a pet dies it is tragic and you need to greive but if I knew I was getting the same dog again next week I might not feel so upset and I think a companion that you've had for years and years deserves more than that.
I watched a thing on channel 4 the other day called "Dead famous DNA" and there are people from religious cults who believe in immortality and claim to have cloned people but whether its true I dont know!

Sent from my GT-I9505 using SalonGeek mobile app
 
I would have thought that the title of the thread was enough to realize what i was referring to, i even elaborated straight after. So to pick away at something I've already corrected, that's just hateful
 
Totally agree.

btw although cloning falls under the umbrella of "bio-chemistry", there is an awful lot more to bio-chemistry than cloning. Cloning is a tiny tiny percentage of what bio-chemistry is all about.

Saying you don't agree with bio chemistry because of cloning is a bit like saying you don't agree with holidays because you don't like Cyprus (or wherever)

I didnt say I didnt agree with it, I just dont see the point in it for people hoping to get the same pet.
I think its good for science

Sent from my GT-I9100 using SalonGeek mobile app
 
I didnt say I didnt agree with it, I just dont see the point in it for people hoping to get the same pet.
I think its good for science

Sent from my GT-I9100 using SalonGeek mobile app[/QUOTE

sorry JemmaB, the only bit relating to your post was the bit where I put "I agree", about people hoping to get the same pet :)

I think it was Tigan who said she didn't agree with bio-chemistry, and as bio-chemistry is something my daughter is considering as a career (but not cloning lol) I just wanted to make the point that there was much more to the subject.

Personally I am against cloning. Totally unnatural and just seems wrong.
 
Gotcha 👍

Sent from my Nexus 7 using SalonGeek mobile app
 
The "Cloning of a pet dog" scenario makes it sound all fluffy and sweet. I'm sure the owner was sincere, but I hope she wasn't disappointed as the character cannot be guaranteed.

What is very worrying, though, is that this is softening us up for further cloning, eg humans. How convenient that might be for a monied psychopath?
 
I dread the day they clone humans, very clever yes, a disaster waiting to happen? A bigger yes.
I'd hate to see inside a government laboratory to see all the abominations they've tried to "create" dangerous people some of these scientists, who knows what they can create and release to see what happens. Including germs and diseases (happened before)

Sent from my D5503 using SalonGeek mobile app
 
Nobody should try to play God.
 
I agree with Dande, in that animals are the stepping stone to cloning humans and there have already been claims made about successful human cloning. I find the whole thing fascinating but it's treading on very dangerous ground.
 
Cloning ethnology isn't about cloning a person. Imagine cloning a new liver, kidneys, heart? No longer would we need donor organs and no longer would people have to take anti rejection drugs.
 
IMO It's no scarier than identical twins (although some of them are kinda creepy).

Sent from my GT-I9505 using SalonGeek mobile app
 

Latest posts

Back
Top