View single post by Glenn
 Posted: Thu May 27th, 2010 12:18 pm
PM Quote Reply Full Topic

Joined: Thu Sep 17th, 2009
Location: N.I
Posts: 2896
Simen wrote: Glenn wrote: Simen wrote: You're saying that if we don't believe in a god then why hasn't man been able to create life? I'm not sure why you think scientists need to be able to create life in order to disprove the existence of a creator.


Man is in the process already ...

1. Remember Dolly the 'Sheep' (1997) ?? And amoungst mice & cow's and other animal's the most recent has been ferret's that have been successfully cloned.

2. Human cloning is not allowed at present, but it can be done.. I think this is a really bad idea to clone a human... Look at the consequence's this will lead to ...

You are very wrong here, cloning means duplicating cutting in half/quaters not creating.

Excisting item only made more.

The concept can be seen in different way's... Have a look at it this way ..


Human cloning is the creation of a genetically identical copy of a human (not usually referring to monozygotic multiple births), human cell, or human tissue. The ethics of cloning is an extremely controversial issue. The term is generally used to refer to artificial human cloning; human clones in the form of identical twins are commonplace, with their cloning occurring during the natural process of reproduction. There are two commonly discussed types of human cloning: therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning. Therapeutic cloning involves cloning cells from an adult for use in medicine and is an active area of research, while reproductive cloning would involve making cloned humans. Such reproductive cloning has not been performed and is illegal in many countries. A third type of cloning called replacement cloning is a theoretical possibility, and would be a combination of therapeutic and reproductive cloning. Replacement cloning would entail the replacement of an extensively damaged, failed, or failing body through cloning followed by whole or partial brain transplant.