You can't fake life

[Kaliel]

I was just having a thought. You can't fake life.

It's true. I was reading in the paper a few months ago about the human cloning the government was trying to do, and unfortunately the results were not good. While the scientists were able to create life, they unfortunately could not create a soul for the body they created.

Kinda put athiest scientists in their place, I mean, instead of the humans being psychologically balanced and intelligent, they were animals, zombies to be exact. When placed into guided situations (basically inside a room with 2 way mirrors), they lashed out and even showed psychotic tendancies. The scientists and psychologists they called in were afraid that if let out into public they would be killing machines.

(Hey, if Bush ever needed an army . . . )

Basically, despite all efforts to control and fix the clones, by altering procedures, etc, they realized one thing. The clones, did not have souls, and therefore it was not possible for humans to create artificial life. Meaning that, there really must be some cosmic energy or spiritual being up there, and we're all pawns in his big game of chess.

So it is true, you can make a baby by artificial insemination, but the egg and the sperm have to be REAL. You can't just make one from silicone and vinyl and decide, "Oh yeah, that'll make a great human." (choice of material is an exaggeration by the way)

So, I thought I'd share my thoughts, what about you?

Kaliel

P.S. YOU CAN'T FAKE LIFE!

[morrigen]

Could you provide a reference or source for these reports?

I'd be interested in reading them.

[Ameniatha]

ja, I agree that you cant fake life...

But the crutch of the whole cloning matter is to develop a means of making spare parts for the human body faster. I mean most people die while waiting for transplants. I believe that cloning could solve this, if it is used for what it was intended...

[Bronwyn]

I don't believe that necessarily god or whomever gave us our soul.. that's not why those humans (did this really happen... I want to read this) were zombie like.. Your mother and father, the passion that they had to bring you into this world is what gave you your soul, you got that from your parents,.. now where the "first" parents got it, I've no freaking clue... I'm just a young woman with a few neat ideas..

Where's that article!?!?!

[Druchii]

I was just having a thought. You can't fake life.

It's true. I was reading in the paper a few months ago about the human cloning the government was trying to do, and unfortunately the results were not good. While the scientists were able to create life, they unfortunately could not create a soul for the body they created.

Kinda put athiest scientists in their place, I mean, instead of the humans being psychologically balanced and intelligent, they were animals, zombies to be exact. When placed into guided situations (basically inside a room with 2 way mirrors), they lashed out and even showed psychotic tendancies. The scientists and psychologists they called in were afraid that if let out into public they would be killing machines.

(Hey, if Bush ever needed an army . . . )

Basically, despite all efforts to control and fix the clones, by altering procedures, etc, they realized one thing. The clones, did not have souls, and therefore it was not possible for humans to create artificial life. Meaning that, there really must be some cosmic energy or spiritual being up there, and we're all pawns in his big game of chess.

So it is true, you can make a baby by artificial insemination, but the egg and the sperm have to be REAL. You can't just make one from silicone and vinyl and decide, "Oh yeah, that'll make a great human." (choice of material is an exaggeration by the way)

So, I thought I'd share my thoughts, what about you?

Kaliel

P.S. YOU CAN'T FAKE LIFE!


I don't that is completely true because we have managed to clone animals successfully enough to have many survive for a long while. Granted, the science of cloning is far from perfect, but you are stating that any scientists doing this would be concerned with a soul. Most people in the medical field leave beliefs of that nature at the door when they come to work. An intangible variable like a soul has no bearing on whether or not the creation has the ability to meet certain criteria like functioning organs, reactive stimuli like pain thresholds, or the ability to problem solve. If such were the case, then wouldn't they subscribe to the thought of NEVER creating clones because it was "morally" wrong in the eyes of God, decency, or just the moral majority?
People with definite shortened life spans from HIV, cancer, or any number of myriad illnesses are used as test subjects anyhow on a lot of new medications and techniques, and they invariably have souls, BUT in lieu of that, if scientists WERE able to create "souless" humanoids, and it was acertainable that they indeed were not truly alive, then where is the harm in creating them? :)

[StoneRavynWolf]

Actually I was in a group that did many test/surveys and such on life and death..did you know that the number of deaths per year co inside with the numbers of births for the same year...just interesting thought to go along with the topic......

[Khuinaset]

Actually I was in a group that did many test/surveys and such on life and death..did you know that the number of deaths per year co inside with the numbers of births for the same year...just interesting thought to go along with the topic......

Then why does the population keep growing? :hrmm:

[Viseux]

Could you provide a reference or source for these reports?

I'd be interested in reading them.

Yes, I would like to see where these facts are coming from as well.

Blessings,
Viseux

[Valnorran]

I was just having a thought. You can't fake life.

It's true. I was reading in the paper a few months ago about the human cloning the government was trying to do, and unfortunately the results were not good. While the scientists were able to create life, they unfortunately could not create a soul for the body they created.

Kinda put athiest scientists in their place, I mean, instead of the humans being psychologically balanced and intelligent, they were animals, zombies to be exact. When placed into guided situations (basically inside a room with 2 way mirrors), they lashed out and even showed psychotic tendancies. The scientists and psychologists they called in were afraid that if let out into public they would be killing machines.

(Hey, if Bush ever needed an army . . . )

Basically, despite all efforts to control and fix the clones, by altering procedures, etc, they realized one thing. The clones, did not have souls, and therefore it was not possible for humans to create artificial life. Meaning that, there really must be some cosmic energy or spiritual being up there, and we're all pawns in his big game of chess.

So it is true, you can make a baby by artificial insemination, but the egg and the sperm have to be REAL. You can't just make one from silicone and vinyl and decide, "Oh yeah, that'll make a great human." (choice of material is an exaggeration by the way)

So, I thought I'd share my thoughts, what about you?

Kaliel

P.S. YOU CAN'T FAKE LIFE!
Uh... what paper did you read this in?

[LadyTrinity]

What do you mean " They couldn't make a soul" ?
Does that mean our soul is our personality and the cloned body had no personality and was a vegetable? :twitch:

[Mister Sandman]

But really, isn't any being raised in a laboratory with no parental or social nurturing aside from stony-faced scientists prodding it with sticks and syringes likely to turn out less than balanced?

[Valnorran]

I think I know what happened. They subscribed to the latest Time-Life series, Home Genetic Engineering. After getting started on their project, they suddenly realized they hadn't yet received the last volume, Soul Installation. I hate it when that happens.

[barlitone]

If in fact there were people actually trying to clone humans, there would be no proof that there is no soul present because there is no scientific proof that a soul exists at all.

I'm not saying it does not exist. But, there is no scientific proof... just like there is no scientific proof that there is even a God, Goddess, or gods. Heck, they're having problems proving that Wang Chung even existed... and I've seen the video for Everybody Have Fun Tonight.

Clones have a major drawback... well, more than one, really. 1) They are made from DNA that has been around for, say, X years, where X is the age of the donor. Folks, your DNA can and does change slightly over the years--if it didn't, aging would not occur and AIDS would be curable (AIDS actually changes the DNA of your helper T cells, so that at a random time, that strand is activated and the virus overtakes the other cells, setting the stage for any bacteria or virus (or fungus) to take over and kill you. That, if you were wondering, is why there will never be a cure, only a vaccine.) Your DNA goes through changes (albeit slight) throughout your life, and if you create a clone when you're 29, the baby's DNA will be that of a 29 year old. It will have Y-29 years of normal life, where Y is your normal lifespan.

Add to that the fun fact that it's not simple to perfectly clone DNA and even Dolly the Sheep had genetic errors and, well, I would not count on cloning doing much for humanity anytime soon. Anyone seen The Clonus Horror? (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078062/) That crappy movie had it right, as did some other posters in this thread.

Cloning will work best if used to regrow organs from DNA that has not been overly damaged by age or disease. Alcoholics could get a new liver from their own DNA. Smokers could get new lungs. Prostitutes could get new... uh, toenail polish. Politicians could get new lips and tongues. The fun never ends!

However, cloning isn't easy, as I said. Much easier than cloning is using stem cells, and the Prez had put a stop to that. While many people bemoan this as ridiculous and inhuman (seeing as how one argument is that women will get pregnant just to sell their unborn fetus cells to stem cell researchers/doctors), I've seen (thanks to my mother being an Illinois state employee) cases where women have kids just to get more benefits from the state and at least two women who purposely have induced labor (with a coathanger to break the water) early in the hopes that the kid will be born with mental or physical issues (like some premature babies are) that also guarantee more money from the state.

I wish I was making that up. But I know.

It seems that, even if we had the technology to use cloning/stem cell research to our advantage, we're not ready for it.

[SphinYote]

Why would the cosmic force or souls not be able to inhabit a cloned body?

I can see no cosmic reason as to why a clone could not have a soul.

Assuming the facts in this article are true (that the clones were created, that they were psychotic and aggressive):
1. Genes are very subtle.
2. Cloning isn't perfect and if the clone survices at all often there are major physical abnormalities from genetic mistakes.
3. Subtle genetic differences can and do cause various types of psychological problems--schizophrenia, etc, for example. Are you implying that schizophrenics don't have souls (not that I'm accusing you of this or anything,, but if you take the logic of the article further, then these questins come up.)
4. There is no reason why the genetic problems of clones can't extend to the workings of the brain, and the likelihood is even greater that there will be problems since the brain is so fundamental to us and even slight variations in genetics and even physical influences can throw things way out of balance...


Thus, I don't see how this article can possibly imply that clones can't have souls.

SphinYote

[SphinYote]

Looks like barlitone and I posted at the same time.

I agree, we're not ready to use the technology yet, if at all. But I think the soul issue isn't really relevant to the cloning issue. If there is a higher force that puts souls into the body, or if souls choose the body, there is no reason why they can't inhabit a cloned body.

If there isn't a soul, then it's a moot point for obvious reasons.

It only becomes an issue when and IF cloning gets far enough along that people excuse harvesting of body parts because clones don't have souls or other issues like that.

[SilentDreams]

I don't know about everyone else but one thing bugged me about this whole thing. Scientists acknowledged(sp) that we have souls. Um last time I checked majority of scientists didn't believe in such things and if they did they certainly didn't bring it into the scientific community.

[Amethyst Rose]

As far as I know, and can determine through research, there has been no experimentation of human cloning, to such an extent as is described in the OP. The technology for it just isn't there, and because it took something like 300 tries to clone Dolly (who still has problems) human rights is adamant about not letting a human life end horribly because of mistakes during cloning. As such, human cloning (at least in North America) is illegal, at this point. While individual cells can be cloned, an entire human cannot....AFAIK...

[MoonDragn]

Actually the whole story is a bit suspect. It is illegal still to clone humans in this country and as far as I know, nobody in the US has attempted it yet. There was talk of the british going to make an attempt but as far as that goes, they haven't attempted it yet. I would like to see what source you got this from.

[Xentor]

I still want to see a report reference in which the goverment states they are cloning humans.

[Bix]

What? They cloned humans?! Why didn't I hear about this, lol?

[Bronwyn]

They are cloning humans! I donated my DNA and a huge chunk of my flesh to science for $60 to pay my cell phone bill last month.. it was probably my offspring.

[nocturnalgoddess]

But really, isn't any being raised in a laboratory with no parental or social nurturing aside from stony-faced scientists prodding it with sticks and syringes likely to turn out less than balanced?

Indeed.

[arctic splash]

You've all had some really good thoughts on this, especially considering we don't have a source to look at. I'd still like to see a source because I'm suspicious... and if it did happen, why haven't I heard about it?

According to your argument, Kaliel, it would seem that people with severe brain damage or who are severely psychotic do not have souls. They sometimes lash out at others or become like zombies. Also, why is it that cloned animals (when cloning actually works) tend to be pretty normal, personality-wise? Am I wrong, or are you making an unstated assumption that animals don't need souls to function, but humans do?

Basically, if this is true, the minimum working hypothesis would be brain damage or birth defects. I don't see how one can make the jump from that particular evidence to the conclusion that these people are born without souls.

[Sowelu]

Soooo...did we ever get a link or reference for the topic of this thread?

[Dio]

I don't believe this for a minute...

I've seen too many horror movies with this same plot...

[greenwitch]

I don't that is completely true because we have managed to clone animals successfully enough to have many survive for a long while. Granted, the science of cloning is far from perfect, but you are stating that any scientists doing this would be concerned with a soul. Most people in the medical field leave beliefs of that nature at the door when they come to work. An intangible variable like a soul has no bearing on whether or not the creation has the ability to meet certain criteria like functioning organs, reactive stimuli like pain thresholds, or the ability to problem solve. If such were the case, then wouldn't they subscribe to the thought of NEVER creating clones because it was "morally" wrong in the eyes of God, decency, or just the moral majority?
People with definite shortened life spans from HIV, cancer, or any number of myriad illnesses are used as test subjects anyhow on a lot of new medications and techniques, and they invariably have souls, BUT in lieu of that, if scientists WERE able to create "souless" humanoids, and it was acertainable that they indeed were not truly alive, then where is the harm in creating them? :)


however according to the bible animals do not have souls, which could be why animal cloning was more successful than it was with humans..... I'm no christian but if you go off that belief everything that was stated is pretty plausible...

[merlo]

Sorry guys, that was one of my viscious rumors run amuck. Yeesh, wish I could take credit for that one. Is it true? Sounds REALLY groovy. I can see the marketing, -reality show of the clones with out souls, with like Marilyn Manson as host and then stuff all the clones in with celebrities we don't need, such as paris hilton and puff daddy,

did I really print that or is this all a dream :fpoke: :foopsies: :durrrr:

[Druchii]

however according to the bible animals do not have souls, which could be why animal cloning was more successful than it was with humans..... I'm no christian but if you go off that belief everything that was stated is pretty plausible...


:) True enough. But the edict here is that, withholding all of that, and breaking it down to unified factors such as universally, most members of the phylum chordata, have common facets in their genetic makeup.
For instance, the skeleton is an incredible creation. There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of variations of it in use today. Bones you will find on a bovine, would be found on a walrus, could be found on an ostrich, and could be found in us. Metacarpal bones, vertebrae, and the most defining factor, our skulls. Granted they are slighty to wildly different in use and perhaps even application, but the simularities exist. My point being is not so much that it has to do with the lack of a soul, but maybe the difficulty in recreating possibly more intricate genetic helixes like those of a platypus that to this day, refuse to clearly catagorized in any species. But if we are indeed so simular in basic function like that of an animal, and indeed they are souless, then why the difficulty in creating a souless being not unlike ourselves, at least asthetically?
At the beginning stages of development as well, most all embryonic stages look very simular. I have seen a crocodilian, a human, and a pig's embryo side by side in a museum and was astounded at my inability to discern them. They were representative models of the embryo at 3 weeks I believe it was. Then they had one at 5 weeks. Only then did I start to see real definitive differences.

[Wolfie Girl]

Actually I was in a group that did many test/surveys and such on life and death..did you know that the number of deaths per year co inside with the numbers of births for the same year...just interesting thought to go along with the topic......


I'd like to hear more on that, sounds interesting.

^..^

[arctic splash]

Me too.

I'd especially like to know how you managed to find that the rate of birth coincides with the rate of death. How can you prove such a thing? Is it human birth and death rate? Is it in a particular place or worldwide? Also, when you say coincide, do you mean the birthrate is equal to the death rate, or that the rate of change of the birthrate is proportional to the rate of change of the death rate.... eek, scary calculus...

[Old Witch]

Err...If the birth rate and death rate are equal...the population of the earth would never increase, right?.....

[MoonDragn]

Aye, thats certainly not true, I know for a fact our population is increasing every year.

[BabblingImp]

ja, I agree that you cant fake life...

But the crutch of the whole cloning matter is to develop a means of making spare parts for the human body faster. I mean most people die while waiting for transplants. I believe that cloning could solve this, if it is used for what it was intended...
I agree with you on that one. I remeber when this all first came in to light, and
I asked my mom to explain it, and she said that she could have another kid that looked just like me, if anything happend to me she could have a kid tht looked just like me, then I said "But it wouldn't be me, I'd be dead, it would be someone else, cause my 'soul' would be gone."

[Illuminatus]

Err...If the birth rate and death rate are equal...the population of the earth would never increase, right?.....

It could, if people lived longer each year! And that is the case in many places.