Clone wars...someday

[RobertScorpio]

Can a human be cloned yet??? And, more importantly, do you think there are already cloned people walking among us???

Rob

 

[TerriO]

You really enjoy pushing the envelope between Sci-Tech and TNZ territory, don't you, Robert?

 

[RobertScorpio]

You really enjoy pushing the envelope between Sci-Tech and TNZ territory, don't you, Robert?

You know, I hadn't thought about that..so I have altered the OP...thanks for the catch

Rob

 

[Pavonis]

There are lots of clones running around right now. They're not called clones, though. They're called "identical twins".

 

[RobertScorpio]

There are lots of clones running around right now. They're not called clones, though. They're called "identical twins".

yeah yeah yeah..I know that...but I mean clones that are raised from skin cells, and things like that....stemcells..ect....are those kinds of clones walking around yet...

Rob

 

[Christopher]

Can a human be cloned yet???

Theoretically, humans could perhaps be cloned using present-day science, but there are enough uncertainties remaining about the process and its long-term viability that nobody with any trace of medical ethics would do it. And it's questionable whether there'd be any reason for doing so. There's value in developing the ability to clone replacement organs and tissues, and the techniques of cloning could perhaps be used to help infertile or same-sex couples conceive children.

As for cloning an army, that's unlikely to have any practical viability. Sci-fi cliches to the contrary, clones would need to develop in their mothers' wombs, be born, grow up, get an education, etc. in the same way that anyone else would, and it would take the same amount of time and resources. If you want a baby boom that can be turned into an army two decades down the road, it would be simpler just to encourage your nation's families to conceive those babies the old-fashioned way.

It might theoretically be possible to genetically engineer a warrior subspecies that matured atypically fast; there are species of animal that mature much faster than humans, because their environment requires that adaptation, so it's within the realm of biological possibility to engineer a human variant that could reach maturity within a few years -- though they'd probably have rather simple minds and limited knowledge. Maybe that's what you'd want if you were a government unethical enough to want to breed a race of cannon fodder. And if you bred a type that was particularly effective, you might want to clone a bunch of copies for consistency in your "product." But in that case, cloning would be the least of the scientific advances you'd have to master.

And, more importantly, do you think there are already cloned people walking among us???

Aside from identical twins/triplets/etc., of course not. Unless you consider cats, dogs, or horses to be people. (Plenty of other species have been cloned, notably sheep and mice, but those are the three I think are most likely to have personhood ascribed to them by their aficionados.)

 

[RobertScorpio]

Can a human be cloned yet???

Theoretically, humans could perhaps be cloned using present-day science, but there are enough uncertainties remaining about the process and its long-term viability that nobody with any trace of medical ethics would do it. And it's questionable whether there'd be any reason for doing so. There's value in developing the ability to clone replacement organs and tissues, and the techniques of cloning could perhaps be used to help infertile or same-sex couples conceive children.

As for cloning an army, that's unlikely to have any practical viability. Sci-fi cliches to the contrary, clones would need to develop in their mothers' wombs, be born, grow up, get an education, etc. in the same way that anyone else would, and it would take the same amount of time and resources. If you want a baby boom that can be turned into an army two decades down the road, it would be simpler just to encourage your nation's families to conceive those babies the old-fashioned way.

It might theoretically be possible to genetically engineer a warrior subspecies that matured atypically fast; there are species of animal that mature much faster than humans, because their environment requires that adaptation, so it's within the realm of biological possibility to engineer a human variant that could reach maturity within a few years -- though they'd probably have rather simple minds and limited knowledge. Maybe that's what you'd want if you were a government unethical enough to want to breed a race of cannon fodder. And if you bred a type that was particularly effective, you might want to clone a bunch of copies for consistency in your "product." But in that case, cloning would be the least of the scientific advances you'd have to master.

And, more importantly, do you think there are already cloned people walking among us???

Aside from identical twins/triplets/etc., of course not. Unless you consider cats, dogs, or horses to be people. (Plenty of other species have been cloned, notably sheep and mice, but those are the three I think are most likely to have personhood ascribed to them by their aficionados.)

Cool post Chris...but with the shady aspects of our own country (and I mean the USA) do you really think that other countries might not already be 'secretly' cloning people for what ever reason???

Rob

 

[Christopher]

Cool post Chris...but with the shady aspects of our own country (and I mean the USA) do you really think that other countries might not already be 'secretly' cloning people for what ever reason???

They'd be stupid to try at this point. If they did, the resultant clones might have shortened lifespans or other serious problems. And of course, if there were people being cloned now, they'd be babies and would take a couple of decades to grow up just like anyone else.

Besides, if somebody were cloning people, why would that be a threat to anyone except the clones themselves? Like I said, there's no sensible value in trying to clone an army; it would be a lot harder, riskier, and more expensive to do that than it would be just to encourage your citizens to make babies the normal way. And you wouldn't get any payoff for nearly two decades.

So there's no reason why anyone would do this in secret. There's absolutely no strategic or political gain to having a secret cloning program. There are some people of questionable ethics working on human cloning -- including a couple of people who've made unreliable claims of having pulled it off successfully -- but they're being quite public about it, because their goal is to gain scientific prestige and, no doubt, the funding that goes with it. Cloning isn't a military technology except in cheesy sci-fi. It's something that might have medical uses and that some unscrupulous researchers are pursuing because it's "cool" and could earn them a place in history. There's no reason why it would be pursued in secret. And anyone who tried to pursue it in secret wouldn't get very far, because science requires peer review and cooperation. Fictional tropes aside, science really isn't something you can do in isolation and secrecy, not unless a government corrals the entire pool of experts in the field to work together in secret, as with the Manhattan Project. And as I've explained, there's no reason why a government would want or need to invest such a huge effort in cloning research, because there's no payoff to justify it. Any government crazy or ignorant enough to try it (and governments do often invest huge amounts of money in junk science) would just be throwing its money away. And while we would be justified in being worried for the well-being of any cloned people created by such irresponsible and premature projects, we'd have no reason to fear them as a threat to the nation or the world. They'd just be people.

 

[RobertScorpio]

actually, if cloning/dna enhancement could create stonger men (ala Khan) and if it was viable? I could see 'them' doing this as we go deeper into a century where fighting for natural resources such as water/oil may be the defining times..


Rob

 

[Pavonis]

Why use human clones, though? Why not robots? Robots can be built far more easily, in greater numbers and far more quickly, and can be designed to be far sturdier than a human. So what would the advantage be in cloning an army versus building one?

Have you been watching the Star Wars prequels recently?

 

[RobertScorpio]

Why use human clones, though? Why not robots? Robots can be built far more easily, in greater numbers and far more quickly, and can be designed to be far sturdier than a human. So what would the advantage be in cloning an army versus building one?

Have you been watching the Star Wars prequels recently?

IMO opinion, Cloning an army of humans is, for now, more feasible than building androids or robots, ala Terminator. We can clone a human, or are pretty close. Android, and lots of them, or Terminator robots? Still a bit further away..

I work for the military. And I have seen some very interesting things along the 'tech' area..but at best they are decades, and several, off.

Rob

 

[Pavonis]

I didn't say androids, just "robots". Granted the most sophisticated robots available now are still pretty dumb compared to a human, but if you're looking for a way to mass-produce an army, then building a bunch of robots would seem to be easier and quicker.

What does a cloned human have to offer that can't be found in any other human? A clone won't grow faster or be any smarter than a "regular" human.

 

[Christopher]

actually, if cloning/dna enhancement could create stonger men (ala Khan) and if it was viable? I could see 'them' doing this as we go deeper into a century where fighting for natural resources such as water/oil may be the defining times..

You seem to be assuming that what you see in science fiction shows and movies is translatable to real life. It isn't. Most of what's depicted about cloning in the mass media, as I've tried to explain, is pure fantasy.

What you're talking about here isn't cloning. You're talking about transgenic modification. That's a totally different science. You can't take two words that are both about biology and use them as though they meant the same thing, any more than you can use the word "tank" to mean "jet." Cloning is not about creating evil superhumans. That's a cliche of fiction. Cloning is simply an alternative way of conceiving babies, and as I've said, one that has no significant advantages over doing it the natural way. The goal of cloning research is not actually to create clones. Cloning is a tool that helps us study genetics and biology and learn things that can be medically useful. It's a means to an end, not an end in itself. There's no realistic concern that cloning could be used to create supersoldiers. That's total crap. Put it out of your mind. Reality doesn't work like a comic book.

Sure, genetic engineering could theoretically be used to make people stronger or more durable, but that's got nothing to do with cloning. And we're decades away from having the ability to do anything like that. Not to mention that we're already seeing a different way of making people stronger:

robotic exoskeletons

. Suits that people can wear to enhance their strength multiple times. This is one science-fiction technology that actually is close to becoming reality. And the US and Japan are on the cutting edge in that field, so there's no need to worry about "them" beating "us" out, unless you consider Japan a "them."

IMO opinion, Cloning an army of humans is, for now, more feasible than building androids or robots, ala Terminator. We can clone a human, or are pretty close. Android, and lots of them, or Terminator robots? Still a bit further away..

You're wrong. We're already building robots for military use. Cloning is still a very iffy technology, and as I've told you three times now, it has no military applications. You're worrying about an imaginary threat from comic books and cheesy movies. You might just as well worry about an invasion by Decepticons or extradimensional demons.