Riker, a murderer?

But we all know how that would have played out. Pulaski would have had her tricorder out and technobabbled something about how they're not conscious or something. Which makes all the speculation as to their level of development moot. The omission does makes the scene come across as hamfisted, and it was in a weak episode.

 

They may have been. They hardly had any screen time...

 

I don't think anyone was literally claiming they looked like "bags of meat" just that features on them and complexion made it clearly look like the clones had not fully formed. They have a glossy, gelatin-looking sheen to their skin and their facial features don't quite look fully formed into the final product (Riker and Pulaski) so they're "bags of meat" and not living creatures.

 

I remember when that episode first aired. There were abortion debates at the time and one of the biggest arguments used (and still used today) is "my body, my decision on what to do with it." I remember thinking that was the "message" the episode was trying to get across.

 

The script uses the term "half-formed", but I suspect that it was necessary for the viewer to see who it was clearly enough so the faces were recognizable as Pulaski and Riker.

 

While it did produce a full grown Human very quickly, how different could it be and still call it "cloning?"

Both clones possess eye lashes.

Also apparently a mouth full of teeth, people without teeth look like they have no teeth, there's a "sunken" appearance to their cheeks.

Both these clones have teeth.

 

Which has nothing to do with anything and says nothing about the level of cognitive development of the clones' brains. And I doubt the producers of the show thought deeply enough about the state of development of the clones to the point of making their mouths look sunken to give the indication of no teeth.

 

If they had gotten the message across that there was no brain function, the killing wouldn't have been as offensive, but there's nothing there to suggest what stage of development their brains are in. From watching it, my impression was that they were probably at least in third trimester fetal equivelent.

 

No.

 

My remark about the skin not looking real was to point out that there is no human development happening here. It's a science fiction process of creating a clone molecularly, which is why the skin is gelatinous looking. It's molecules haven't stabilized. Taking that into account & the likelihood that other parts of the anatomy are in a similar kind of molecular generation, it can't be functionally alive. To say it's not a viable human is not the point. It's not even a viable organism yet, because it's being constructed molecularly. When it's finished doing that, then it can become a functioning organism. It's not like real cloning

 

I disagree with your supposition, it's a case of taking a number of lving cells and then growing two living beings from those cells, and not somehow creation a duplicate out of whole cloth.

Why would they take living cells, kill those cells, basically replicate a full sized corpse, and then bring that dead tissue to life?

Okay, then why did the characters repeaedly use the terms "clone" and "cloning" in the epiosde?

 

I guess, if we go as far as to postulate that "tng cloning" is not "real" cloning then we may as well go all the way and say that tng murder is not real murder or that tng morality or ethics are not real morality or ethics and therefore follow pretty much laws of their own that "real" common sense will never truly understand.

Note that the only person that Data ever tried to kill is kiva Fajo from The Most Toys, while he wasn't even threatening his life or anyone's and that his capture was only seconds away.

Does this seem "logical' to you? Was that really the worst people that Data had ever met? To me it seems like and emotional response, not particularly rational.

But then again, tng emotion is not "real" emotion, so why bother...

 

You clearly have no desire to discuss this in a reasonable manner and are dead-set in your thoughts and opinions and have no want to hear what other people have to say on the issue.

As far as "TNG cloning" vs. "real cloning", I suspect what the poster was talking about was cloning via using genetic material and implanting it into an embryo for growth in a host like any other biological being. (How cloning works in the real world.) Vs. taking some genetic sample from full-grown adults and using it to, somehow, create an adult copy of the donor.

 

^Exactly. Thank you.

They use the word transporter too. My car is a transporter. It's not like their transporter

My point is that they are using a method of cloning unlike what we do, where we clone cells with which to make an embryo. From the point at which the embryo is made, the organism is as alive as any authentic embryo. So those clones are alive, even during prenatal development

That isn't what the TNG clones are. They have somehow incubated the cells into a full grown human, a process which by logic & appearance is happening at the molecular level. It's brain, lungs, heart, liver, skin & everything else is under construction in that incubation chamber. Without those things being fully constructed, the clone cannot sustain life. So, in this wholly fictional representation of cloning, it stands to reason that once it's complete, only then can it become alive.

They didn't kill them. They incubated them. They somehow grew the cells into the parts of a human

 

And my take on what was presented in the scene is that the two clones were adult Human beings with a full compliment of organs, inside and out. This would explain the two clearly seen faces. Faces with full features, eye lashes, lips, teeth, ears.

Starting with the small number of stolen cells, the cloners accerated the natural process several thousand times. instead of taking nine months to reach "new born" size, the two clone would reach that stage in less than a hour.

At the sixteen hour mark the two clones would be teenagers. In a day they would be in their twenties.

I believe that intent of the cloners was to grow nuRiker and nuPulaski at an accerater rate until they (the clones) were both young adults. Diana Muldaur was in her early fifties at the time the episode was made, I can't see any reason why the cloners would deliberately produce a fifty year old person.

So (perhaps) nuPulaski would stop accelerate growth at some point in about her early twenties, and would emerge from her chamber at hat point. I'm not clear if the clone would possess Pulaski's memories.

The cloners apparently didn't want to produce a new born sized person.

Now that would have made for a different scene, if Riker had phasered two new born appearing clones in the growth chambers.

 

I vaguely had the impression that the clones would have had the memories of the original person.
That's a good point as to how much more disturbing the scene would've been if Riker had killed newborn looking clones.

 

If it's done becoming a person, then why would you keep it in an incubation chamber? What it appears you're saying is that they keep it in there to accelerate its growth to adulthood, after it's already become an actual person. Sidestepping the fact that this would be a monumental waste of life time, & resources, with very little reward for the effort, that's not what we saw.

The 1st picture I posted is clearly of a partially formed adult human being, partially formed at a molecular level. The body is still slightly translucent. That's not a normal state of existence for a human. It's tissues are still being formed, formed into an adult clone right off. It can't live like that, until it's done forming a viable organism


The whole reason for that^ shot is to say "This body isn't formed yet". Otherwise they'd just use an actor's body

 

Because it's make believe. It doesn't even approach anything resembling reality.

Sometimes I wonder if people around here understand that.

Except for the feet washing part. That's absolutely real, and a lot of fun.

 

Fiction? Sure, but in any discussion of Star Trek (I feel) there need to be a clear separation of "in-universe" and out-universe."