Evidence for God from Science

Why don't clones live? Scientifically? Spiritually? Maybe they don't have souls? Anyone ever think about this?

P.S. Have humans been cloned yet?

Interesting question, but you might want to compare between clones created by man and natural clones. There are numerous organisms that reproduce naturally by cloning quite successfully. For example, some salamanders of the family Ambystomatidae reproduce solely by cloning, as the populations are all-female. Just one example, but there are many.

Never has the statement "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle" been more true it seems than in the case of these salemanders....

HEY, how is your avatar so big? Cheater! And with an avatar with that guy in it...your credibility has dropped to zero....

...

AttentionKmartShoppers wrote:HEY, how is your avatar so big? Cheater! And with an avatar with that guy in it...your credibility has dropped to zero....

I don't know why it came out so big...it wasn't that big on the site I linked it from! Anyway, I love The Daily Show, but people treat John Stewart like he's a political figure while forgetting it's a COMEDY show! As far as my credibility relying on John Stewart, that's fine with me because all the information (not the jokes, mind you) used in the show are taken directly from valid sources (Bush's own press conferences, scientific journal publications, etc). People that hate the show often feel their viewpoint is being mocked...which it usually is, I guess.

I never said he isn't funny. What he says is rather hilarious, but misrepresents the facts.

And is manipulated for entertainment, all sides of the political parties are made fun of, but usually the current president. Besides you do know what Jon Stewart's religion is don't you? I don't believe that matches your organism religion.

Thinker wrote:And is manipulated for entertainment, all sides of the political parties are made fun of, but usually the current president. Besides you do know what Jon Stewart's religion is don't you? I don't believe that matches your organism religion.

I would have actually liked to see the show before Bush became president to see if they mocked Clinton with similar brutality, but I don't think the shows are syndicated yet and I don't even know when the show started...I do think, however, that Bush provides way to much comedic fodder to be ignored, what with his double talk and inability to speak English or recite cliches correctly! As far as Stewart's religion is concerned, it's just another way that people take the show too seriously...I don't watch it because of the host's religion and I'm not going to ignore it because his beliefs don't match mine.

But to get back on track, I know that one source of clone mortality can be due to the unsuitability of the donor cell with the "parent", if you will. It's like when an organ is transplanted into another person and the recipient's body rejects it and causes things such as infection. If the donor and recipient are in any way incompatible, there is a chance that the "offspring" may not survive. Whether or not these compications could carry on in an individual that actually made it to birth, I am unsure, but it seems plausible.

Double talk? Bush is the only source of that? And Bush not being able to speak English just goes to show exactly how horrible Kerry must have been for him to win the second time around.

Clones do[i/] live!
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b331/ ... loning.jpg

Here are two articles that gives a little insight into the poor health of clones:

Epigenetic reprogramming in the mammalian embryo: struggle of the clones. Mellissa RW Mann1 and Marisa S Bartolomei. Genome Biol. 2002

Dean W, Santos F, Stojkovic M, Zakhartchenko V, Walter J, Wolf E, Reik W. Conservation of methylation reprogramming in mammalian development: aberrant reprogramming in cloned embryos. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:13734—13738

The basic message as it relates to clone failure is that there are problems with the "reprogramming" of a recipient cell after it receives the donor DNA....which often leads to a cascade of further, often detrimental problems.

Here is another, more comprehensive review of the basics of mammalian cloning, why it can work and why it often doesn't...this one is a little easier to read relative to the above articles.

Solter, D. 2000. MAMMALIAN CLONING: ADVANCES AND LIMITATIONS. Nature Reviews Genetics, Dec2000, Vol. 1 Issue 3, p199, 9p

Hope this helps...

Mystical wrote:P.S.

You quoted my 'clones' thread. I'm glad. No one really took it seriously. I do. Do you have a serious answer? Can you answer any of it for me? You don't need to give me proof. I just want to know what you think and maybe why.

Well THEREAL gave an example of amphibian clones. Heres an example of a snake that clones itself. It is commonly known as the flowerpot snake (Ramphotyphlops braminus), and they are triploid and reproduce
parthenogenetically, giving birth to only daughters. Daughters that are an exact copy of themself. Thats right, the entire population is nothing but females. No need for males when your triploid.

Obviously cloning is quite realistic and can have detrimental effects, especially in this case to the entire species population. Doesn't allow for increase in genetic diversity making them vulnerable.

The spiritual part is obviously directed toward human cloning. For that I have no idea. Hard to say what would happen if a human was cloned, how it would behave, how long it would live etc...

The soul part you brought up, I'm skeptical when it comes to an actual physical soul that a person looses upon death. A study a while back attempted to see if people had souls by weighing them on a table as they died. They reported a weightloss making some people think it was them loosing their soul. I believe the weight loss noticed from humans is a result of gas loss due to muscle relaxation from death. Its very common for dead bodies to continuously release gas for hours after death by farting.
Another reason why I don't believe it is because the same was done with animals with no weight loss reported. It goes back to the old school belief that animals don't go to heaven, which I don't believe.[/i]

Souls aren't commonly thought to be physical...