One step closer.....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110117/wl_asia_afp/japansciencemammoth_20110117104445
I personally think its pretty dang cool.

 

The real question is whether anything will want to resurrect humans.

John

 

With our track record? Talk about ingrates!

I thought about posting a different link, same story.

Scientists aim to bring mammoth back to life

 

Wow ! this will be huge. I really dunno what to say to this.
Even though this is possible, they cannot resurrect humans.

Humans have a soul which is the real thing that is alive, not our bodies.

 

Its cloning not resurrection. Yes you could probably do it with humans but it would unethical and the red tape would be insane. That being said look for someone like N Korea or Iran to try it in a couple decades.

 

Figure sooner. There are truely evil reasons to clone humans (who will have a soul, such as it is). Spare parts anyone?

 

Spare parts anyone?

The movie: "The Island"

 

Its cloning not resurrection. Yes you could probably do it with humans but it would unethical and the red tape would be insane. That being said look for someone like N Korea or Iran to try it in a couple decades.

The article used "resurrect" correctly in my opinion. The animals have been long dead. A variety of molecular biology techniques may be used to attain that end.

When you say cloning would be unethical with humans, are you referring to just in the United States or globally? To a whole human or to human parts?

Other countries do not have the same standards, and they are not just countries like NKorea or Iran. In fact, a good part of the world does not follow the American rules for ethical research involving humans.

John

 

I think I was pretty clear. Creating people so you could harvest the parts.

 

There are two main issues here. One is the distinction between ethics and morality. The second is that great advances have been made in creating whole, functioning organs from cloned cells. The first 3D cell culture of organ tissue was accomplished at the University of Pittsburgh more than a decade ago. Some individuals object to organ creation by cloning on both moral and ethical grounds, particularly when embryonic stem cells are used. I do not. Until recently, use of human embryonic stem cells in the US was prohibited on ethical ground.

On the moral issue, note that there is at least one documented case in which a woman had an additional child in the hope that the new child would be a compatible organ donor for another relative. Apparently, no law was broken, but I do not think it was a moral act. I see very little moral difference between that and creating a cloned child, once one accepts cloning of whole individuals. The latter is, of course, not yet allowed in the US.

John

 

The way I see it, the current western society doesn't impede the advance of technology at any level. Politicians or the public often object to the innovations it brings, but in the end the society wraps around the technology and not vice versa.

There always is a period of strong debates but finally the legal system is always changed to include new technological achievements.

Stem cells are a good example. Europe has accepted them for the most part. The US are still sceptical but I think in the end they will allow homeland research (or they will import their organs from Europe )

 

I think I was pretty clear. Creating people so you could harvest the parts.

But then your gonna have to out price the Chinese's prisoner transplant program which cloning people for organs would be much much much more expensive. The best technology would be to just grow a single organ. Will a clone have a soul? Of coarse its a clone. Its a living breathing copy of a human. So it will have as much of a sole as the gene donor.

 

The article used "resurrect" correctly in my opinion. The animals have been long dead. A variety of molecular biology techniques may be used to attain that end.

When you say cloning would be unethical with humans, are you referring to just in the United States or globally? To a whole human or to human parts?

Other countries do not have the same standards, and they are not just countries like NKorea or Iran. In fact, a good part of the world does not follow the American rules for ethical research involving humans.

John

Yes the article used it correctly the posters did not. Resurrect means just bring back to life. So yes they will be resurrecting the Mammoth. But if there were still other mammoths alive it would not be the right term. Your cloning the mammoth animal, your resurrecting the mammoth species.

I don't believe in human cloning. I do agree with cloning parts, but nothing in the brain. I believe your soul is just the wiring and electrical pulses of the brain.

 

Cloning is just another form of twinning. The clone is a unique individual, a person, not a thing. While natural twins are similar, they also have differences.

Eventually we'll be able to grow body parts, which will be fairly different. But raising a child from a baby to an eventual adult who is 40 years younger (there is no such thing as accelerated growth, this is a Hollywood plot twist) is pretty horrendous if he is being raised to be murdered.

Truth, stem cell research is as likely to happen in the USA as anywhere.

 

Soylant Green!!!!