>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.
1) But that's exactly the same situation with natural mutations, which occur with every generation! <sarcasm>What's your solution to that problem?</sarcasm> In any case, you might be interested in reviewing this thread for my views on that (tangential) topic:
Our Biotech Future.
2) How do you know that a technology like that won't someday save the human race? Sure, there are plenty of people around nowadays so we don't see why we'd need many more very quickly. (Aside: it's surreal that I'm getting Malthusian warnings from someone who linked to the brilliant Julian Simon, but anyway.) But what if someday the small remnant of humanity faces extinction, and needs to increase its numbers? Can you guarantee that we won't need to have such a technique in our bag of tricks? Whether it be cloning, or gene selection
3) I should have included sarcasm tags (see above). YOU were the one who was hinting that reproducing human beings (who happen to have been cloned, but they're as human as you or I) constitute a problem. As for Simon, I am foursquare in his camp. People, be they clones, test-tube babies or otherwise, are the solution and not the problem.
I wrote:
Whether it be cloning, or gene selectionSorry about the sentence fragment; Lord knows what happened to it. The original read, "Whether it be cloning or gene selection, I can't predict what technologies my descendents are going to need in order to survive."