The technology exists to clone Stephen Hawking. Although no one has had the nerve to do it, the same technology that was used to clone other animals would work on humans. Various governments and religions have taken a stand declaring cloning humans to be immoral. But I’ve never heard a reason why cloning should be banned.
So I say let’s clone Hawking. Yes, I understand that the clone will not start out with the knowledge or skills of Stephen Hawking. It’s like having an identical twin separated at birth by both space and time. But – is there something genetic about Hawking that would make his clone have the same abilities as Stephen himself? What if the clone were raised in an ideal environment where he was trained by the world’s leading physicists. Would the clone pick up where Hawking left off?
Whether it worked or not we would at a minimum learn a great deal about cloning. The possibility that his skills might live on in the clone would be a gift to the human race.
So – I’d like to open up a discussion as to why we shouldn’t do this. Thoughts?
#34 – Thomas,
Very well said!
#54 – Alfred1,
We have immaterial souls that come into existence at conception…
You ask the wrong questions Alfred. Let’s start with your premise. You state as fact that we have immortal souls.
Exactly how do you know this?
You really should learn to separate what is your belief because you have had your brain steeped in the bible, thus crippling it, from birth, versus what is objectively verifiable.
You are free to state that in your opinion we have souls and that in your opinion, this is an issue for clones. However, you don’t really get to just state it as fact and then attempt to make a coherent argument from a false premise.
For me, it is my opinion that upon death, I will be in exactly the same state as I was for the 13.73 billion years that the universe existed before me. As I remember nothing from that time and had no thoughts at that time and accomplished nothing during that time, I expect to do the same after my death. No light. No tunnel. No grace of god. No fire and brimstone. Just a slab of meat that was briefly me to be recycled back into the food chain.
What verifiable evidence do you have to the contrary? A book written by numerous authors over a long period of time that is not even self-consistent? C’mon, at least learn what science is before you decide to throw it out.
#61 – Cursor_
How about Jesus? I hear they have finger bones of his.
Sold in packs of twelve of course.
Good thing I wasn’t drinking my coffee when I read that.
Shouldn’t we be able to clone Jesus from a nice fresh Nabisco ™ Little-Bits-O-Jesus communion wafer?
No need to waste time on someone as useless or unproductive as Jeebus.
Hawking? Certainly.
Just might make sense at early stages to fiddle around – practice – with a few “ordinary” subjects, first. Get the process sorted out. Then do someone more likely to be scientifically productive.
The whining from the superstitious will be no less.
Marc,
June 22 – 7:22 am EDT
Dvorak Uncensored:
Error establishing a database connection
Dvorak’s Cage Match:
Connection Problems
Sorry, SMF was unable to connect to the database. This may be caused by the server being busy.
Please try again later.
So, you think you’re clever enough to clone Stephen Hawking with no unintended consequences?
It’d be more fun to have him ravished by a large herd of Playboy Bunnys ! 😉
Well you can spend a trillion dollars on this project making a few people rich, or you can actually start solving real problems in the world, like maybe spread out that trillion to make sure people are fed and homed in all these foreclosure they are now tearing down.
Out of those 7 million helped get through a whole lifetime with this proper use of funds, you might just find 10 or 12 better than Hawking/Einsteinsn’s with some added beyond the Beatles, Bob Hopes, and Idols, along with no crime rate.
I was taught that each human is unique and a product of genetics and environment: genetics set the limits and the environment allowed fulfillment.
Should we breed geniuses? Of Course. As a general rule, we brighter sorts are happier than you blog posters. Not as rich, not as hip, not as socially acceptable, but being self actualized in our motivation–we are generally happy.
We would have to be separated from the masses. Nothing upsets an intelligent person more than having to put up with the BS from the average and above average competitors for space and food. As to the below average, generally intelligent people aren’t interested in politics or religion.
Would the new creatures need loving supportive parents? Yes. We don’t need a bunch of Lex Luthers running around pissed off about their poor upbringings. Obviously, special adoptive volunteers and social programs will be needed as its painfully obvious our society does a BAD job of raising our kiddies. Genetically gifted kids should not be made to suffer such abuse.
Society also has an interest in raising genetically gifted jocks and beautiful people as well.
Until it can all come together in an Intelligently Designed way, I can see society resources being split among these various deserving groups.
Competition, strife, the need for a supportive society (it does take a village).
Add it to the list.
# 49 gooddebate said,
Wasn’t there a movie where one of Hitlers doctors created several clones of Hitler and placed them with families around the world. The doctor was played by Gregory Peck I think. He was caught because he was going around and killing the fathers of the clones because Hitlers father was died when he was 7.
The Boys From Brazil, based on a book by Ira Levin (IIRC- IMDB follows). Peck was Dr. Mengele.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077269/
J/P=?
The experiences we’ve had with animal cloning suggests that, the resulting clone will be an individual and distinct from the host. He may not develop any understanding of advances physics.
I suggest, that with 6+ billion people on the world, we find a few people with advanced knowledge of physics and fund them instead of spending the millions it would take to clone Stephen Hawking. There are people doing work as advanced as Dr. Hawking. We could ask him for suggestions.
3 Dave T said, “We’re all born blank.” Bzzzt, wrong. Hain’t no such thing as a blank slate. We’re all born with a mess of unfortunate baloney in our heads, most notably an aching need to “believe” in some damn deities or other.
Why can’t we just put his brain in a robot body? Nothing will ever beat the original.
“Ever make a copy of a copy and have it not come out as clear?”
-Multiplicity
With all do respect to Dr. Hawking, well, why clone just one guy? We should clone many more people. I would like to have some clones of me. One to do my hard work, one to pay my bills and another one to fix my car and my house. 4 me. But I think my wife would not approve it. It would be too much bs coming from same me.
Yeap, every year that goes by reveals just how much more influence our genetic code has. They’ve got the homo gene nailed down to a complex of 4-5 genes. Seems like “need to believe” is also somewhat localized. Trouble is, on most interesting issues, there is more than one gene involved and it all interacts with the “garbage DNA” that turns out to have lots of secrets.
I like to think of it this way: How would a cantaloupe react? Then I compare that with my own reaction. Difference is mostly genetics. Then I watch my sister argue with the cantaloupe and I see its genetics once again.
With all do respect to Dr. Hawking, well, why clone just one guy? We should clone many more people. I would like to have some clones of me. One to do my hard work, one to pay my bills and another one to fix my car and my house. 4 me. But I think my wife would not approve it. It would be too much bs coming from the same “me”.
#77 – orangetiki,
Sorry, The Onion beat you to that idea.
http://tinyurl.com/fu9k5
Evolution, including man directed, will favor the genetically and socially gifted over the less advantaged. Bad copies will fail while copies better than the original will thrive.
When I was a kiddie, we were taught that IQ regressed to the mean==meaning smarter people tended to have dumber kids, and dumb people smarter kids===all varying and converging on the mean. We can all think of well known cases that are just the opposite but who cares what science has to say when beliefs are at issue? Thats one of many reasons that cloning makes such good sense. I’d think in the right program there would be lots of well motivated people to be good parents.
Future is so bright, I gotta wear shades.
#81 – bobbo,
Evolution, including man directed, will favor the genetically and socially gifted over the less advantaged.
This does not seem to be borne out by the observable fact of humanity breeding stupider. 🙂
Before we are born DNA is subjected to the onslaught of entropy. You can’t take DNA from an adult and clone a duplicate. It has been altered by the environment. If however you preserve DNA soon after or before birth, you can come close. What you can never duplicate is nurture. Identical twins have the same DNA, but are different. Another poster mentioned epigenetics.
Besides, how many theoretical physicist does the world need?
I’ve always looked at human beings as 4 components.
1. Hardware: Obviously your body, genetics etc.
2. Firmware: Everything you’re born with, instincts, breathing, eyes blinking, basically everything to run your body and your survival. Babies are even hard wired to recognize their parents facial expressions and interact with other humans, etc
3. Software: You. Contains all of your algorithms of thinking, emotions and runs the bus to store everything in memory. It is self learning and extremely complex.
4. Ram: Your IQ and how much of all of this can be stored.
Software is the only thing your not born with. That develops over your life. Who knows, the brain can be just one giant wifi card and we’re actually stored somewhere else. When we die we upload back up. How’s that for cloud computing?
Hmmm, what if…. we clone Hawking and he becomes everything he was in the original.
Just think, he would again become a theoretical physicist, he would rediscover Hawking Radiation, and would eventually write “A Brief History of Time”… again.
Cloning would also clone the illness that had him spend his adult life trapped in a crippled body. Now if we could extract his knowledge.
I’m opposed to cloning people with major medical problems unless we fix the problems first.
Hawking has stated that the drive to achieve what he has in the field of science is a direct result of his medical condition.
The money would be better spent educating some promising individuals if you are talking about tax money.
If some person or organization wants to do it with a healthy gifted person I don’t care.
I say why not, but my clone disagrees with me.
I’d rather see the California tax payers pay to clone the Octomom.
two words: Brain Transplant!
Re:#91… two words:
Old brain.
#64 One should make that decision only if they are willing to assume the responsibility of proper parenting which should including putting one’s children ahead,/b> of oneself in importance.
Are you kidding? This stupid attitude is the cause of kids being so self centered and ignorant.
My kids fit into my life. Yes it required changes to my life but they ARE NOT the center of the world. I love them like they are but they don’t control it.
What if we went to that expense only to find that the clone wanted to pursue a career in ballet dancing? Would the clone have an obligation to “pay back the debt” or would the clone be allowed to pursue his own identity?
Don’t be surprised if this is the result!
http://goodwilljester.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/dalek3.jpg