Re: His point is still valid though

Re: His point is still valid though
Re: His point is still valid though -- skibummer	Post Reply		Forum

Posted by: Boris
10/26/2005, 18:31:41

(About author)

Edit

Boris> In cloning, you would be both of the "parents".

SKB> Well, you wouldn't be a 'parent'. A more accurate term would be that you would be a twin, not a parent. The 'parents' would be whoever your parents were.

Boris> Biologically speaking, because we all come from the process of reproduction, we all have parents. When you clone a human, you will start with an infant with two biological parents. That infant will have biological parents who will be the same person. This is how it will be at least until we can figure out a way to clone without altering the reproductive procedures.

SO, if you clone a human today, the source will be both biological parents of the clone. The carrier of the fetus will be nothing but a surrogate, similar to a "test tube" conception with both biological parent's chromosomes in a different womb.
Boris

Post Reply | Email Friend | Alert

Previous | Next | Current page

Followups

Narrow thinking --- skibummer ( 26-10-2005 ) ( 1874 bytes ) +1
- Re: Narrow thinking **** Worse than that!!!! Ignorance!!! --- Boris ( 27-10-2005 ) ( 3110 bytes ) +1
  - Back up your assertions. --- skibummer ( 27-10-2005 ) ( 1665 bytes ) +1
    - Re: Back up your assertions. --- Boris ( 27-10-2005 ) ( 2832 bytes ) +2
      - What the heck does incest have to do with anything --- Crossbowman ( 27-10-2005 ) ( 2601 bytes ) +1
        
        The comparison... --- Boris ( 27-10-2005 ) ( 1208 bytes )
      - You may want to clean up your post --- skibummer ( 27-10-2005 ) ( 2144 bytes ) +1
        
        Sorry --- Boris ( 27-10-2005 ) ( 736 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: Sorry --- skibummer ( 28-10-2005 ) ( 2072 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: Re: Sorry --- Boris ( 29-10-2005 ) ( 1752 bytes ) +2
        
        Trying to catch up: Summary? First cousin marriage is better. --- DWA ( 29-10-2005 ) ( 542 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: Trying to catch up: Summary? First cousin marriage is better. *CORRECT* --- Boris ( 29-10-2005 ) ( 235 bytes ) +1
        
        Mysterious error correction mechanisms in DNA --- DWA ( 29-10-2005 ) ( 1508 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: Mysterious error correction mechanisms in DNA... Basically correct. --- Boris ( 30-10-2005 ) ( 689 bytes ) +1
        
        I think most agree --- skibummer ( 30-10-2005 ) ( 1287 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: I think most agree --- Boris ( 30-10-2005 ) ( 774 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: Re: I think most agree --- skibummer ( 30-10-2005 ) ( 625 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: Re: Re: I think most agree *** I did say so. --- Boris ( 30-10-2005 ) ( 458 bytes ) +1
        
        Perhaps you meant to --- skibummer ( 31-10-2005 ) ( 1525 bytes ) link
        
        Progress? --- skibummer ( 29-10-2005 ) ( 1076 bytes )