[Physicist]

These are human beings you're talking about. Human beings already do that, even without cloning. What's your solution to that problem?

At any rate, cloning won't make the problem worse. The clones still need mothers to bear them. Lack of available wombs is the limiting factor in either case.

[MarkWar]

>These are human beings you're talking about. Human beings already do that[self replicate], even without cloning. (3) What's your solution to that problem? At any rate, (1) cloning won't make the problem worse. (2) The clones still need mothers to bear them.

I don't mean to offend you, but I think you're being disingenuous.

(1) Of course cloning makes things worse. Because clones can be created with modified genetic makeup and then "released" (yech -- sounds like we're talking about trout) into the general population to pass on the modified gene set. And there's just no way to predict the consquences of genetic modifications & interactions until they've been observed for generations and generations. And, of course, in the general population -- as somebody has already observed -- you can't recall a bad gene set...

2) I'm sure someone somewhere is working on an artificial womb chock full of growth factors etc. that will speed development time and make the whole process of "women" superfluous.

3) Solution? To human breeding? I wasn't aware is was a problem! Kind of a Nazi-like statement on your part, don't you think? Population is a resource to be treasured, not a pest to be eradicated.

Mark W.