-deleted-
Posted: 21 December 2007 07:02 PM   [ Ignore ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  233
Joined  2007-10-18

-deleted-

[ Edited: 07 March 2011 04:25 PM by J.C.]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 December 2007 10:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  651
Joined  2006-12-08
Joel Armstrong - 22 December 2007 12:02 AM

If we were to clone a famous Muslim person, might it have the effect of causing some Muslim people to finally question some things about their faith?

Would the clone also be Muslim?  I don’t think it would be nearly as effective if he wasn’t.

 Signature 

Do-gooding is like treating hemophilia—the real cure is to let hemophiliacs bleed to death, before they breed more hemophiliacs. -Robert Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 December 2007 10:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  233
Joined  2007-10-18

-deleted-

[ Edited: 07 March 2011 04:27 PM by J.C.]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 December 2007 01:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  949
Joined  2007-10-08

Assuming the INfamous muslim cloned were the “prophet” muhammed, the muslims would probably kill him for insulting the prophet! LOL

Although the clone would have the same DNA, there is no way to predict which genes will “express” themselves in the clone…the incubation process would be totally different from the original. The diet of this man’s mother during her pregnancy cannot be genuinely recreated, so assuming your clone has the best of “womb-like” environments, the clone might be better or worse than the original, physically and neurobiologically. Simply put: you can’t bake the same cake twice.
That aside, if the clone was an accurate duplication of this illiterate tribesman, chances are, he wouldn’t turn out the same because the nurture (and nutrition) part of his existence would be vastly improved…he wouldn’t have to be illiterate and would probably have a much better life as a clone. (Although,  he might be considered mildly retarded compared to the hundreds of years of genetic evolutionary improvement.) Personally, I don’t think the miscreant deserves another chance.
Would the muslims change their worldview if modern science were able to do this? Doubtful. They would consider it just another example of the evils of the west. And like I said at the beginning of this post: they’d probably kill him.  confused

 Signature 

“Proving the efficacy of a methodology without defining the word ‘efficacy’ can come back to bite you in the assertion.”—Salt Creek

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 December 2007 11:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5404
Joined  2006-09-27
Antisocialdarwinist - 22 December 2007 03:07 AM

Would the clone also be Muslim?  I don’t think it would be nearly as effective if he wasn’t.

Don’t be ridiculous. You have to create two clones. Raise one of them a Jew and one as a Muslim.  Then let them resolve the matter in a cage fighting match.

The clones would be conceived, gestate, and be born. You could raise them to be anything you wanted, within limits of course.

Raising one to be an Islamic Catholic Buddhist Hindu Jew would be a great trick, however.

 Signature 

INVEST in cynicism!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 December 2007 12:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  892
Joined  2007-12-04

I think it would be good to explore what type of effect a successful human cloning experiment might have on making people question their religion.  If we were to successfully clone a human being, could it have the effect of making people question that only their religious Gods are capable of creating human life?  What would it say about the religious notion of a human soul, when it was created by scientists in a laboratory?

Actually, this is a good topic that does not have to go as far as a human being, and not as far as cloning.
It occurs to me that at the current exponential progress in microbiology and related fields it is just a matter of time before we can create life, albeit in very simple forms. This would obviously be immensely important for understanding abiogenesis. I know that experiments have been done in which scientists have managed to cause an imitation of earths early atmosphere to create amino acids when given the necessary energy.
What does it make of god, the day when we can create a simple organism in a laboratory, what about the day when we can accelerate the reproduction and mutation and recreate evolution in an artificial ecosystem.
What about the day when we can blueprint a creatures genetics and create it completely artificially in a lab. Although we are far from some of these things, there is nothing that puts a theoretical stop to it, given that development continues, the day will come.

I wrote an article on this very topic for a paper some time ago. Not just creating life per say, but how human technology affects the image of, primarily the god of Abraham.

Half of the miracles of Jesus are really not miracles the day we can replicate it trough very mortal means. We can easily treat sickness, lots more sickness than Jesus ever did. We are just at the present day seeing an explosion in advances of actually giving sight back to people who have been blind since birth. What kind of a divine god is it, if we mere mortals, at the dawn of our youth can accomplish the same thing.
Let the clock spin for another hundred years or more, lets go to the day when we can essentially stop aging. What happens to immortal life in heaven, if you are immortal in this world? (unless you are blown to pieces or something), in which case we can wind the tape even further forward, to the day when we can replicate every single biochemical and electrical impulse in the brain and basically copy a personality and consciousness. You go out and get run over by a truck, the doctors just recreate your brain from a datafile and you are essentially the same person as when the brain scan was taken.

I know religious people hate this, because they fear this. Whenever I argue like this they blow up in my face like an angry beard of bees.
I get the “You are implying that man is god! HERETIC!” The violent reaction is due to a commandment, and its due to fear. Fear of this notion. There is nothing appalling about man acquiring these abilities, such technological power will undoubtedly put great demands on morality and responsibility, but if we can spend the next 100 years developing our philosophy and our morality without ignorance, the future generations of humans will be enlightened enough to view the best rationalists of today as backwards.

The fear, simply comes from the realization that man is quickly matching the supposed creator, and if technological advancement continues, the only barriers that sets limits to what we can do, are the barriers set by the laws of physics. In which case one day the human race (if smart enough to survive its brilliance), will outmatch this supposed creator with ease. Religion knows, that it will die, eventually. If science goes on, religion will not survive.
Its inevitable.

And this is why they seek to dismantle it, this is why the people of the cloth wish us to remain in this society. Because in hundreds of years from now, no level of ignorance will be able to retain the belief in the christian or muslim god.
The only question, is if these people will abandon their superstition now, and help us develop human thinking enough so that we do not kill ourselves with our future technology. Or if they will fight the inevitable and try to unmake our world.

 Signature 

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 December 2007 12:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1485
Joined  2007-12-10

Surely there are other, far better reasons for cloning a human being than merely to add yet another bullet point to the atheist’s checklist.  Yes, I think it would be interesting to do that and yes the religious implications would als be interesting…but having that be the primary reason seems pretty silly. 

I would definitely like to see it done on some level though, just to know we are capable of it from a technological pov.  I’d love to see mass production cloning of some vital organs too for transplant patients.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2007 04:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  233
Joined  2007-10-18

-deleted-

[ Edited: 07 March 2011 04:26 PM by J.C.]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2007 04:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  233
Joined  2007-10-18

-deleted-

[ Edited: 07 March 2011 04:26 PM by J.C.]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 December 2007 12:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]  
Newbie
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  44
Joined  2007-12-22

Unbeliever .. Great statements, and I am 100% with you.

I have said it for many years, that we as a society/civilization are being held back by the Faith Based Organizations of our world. Until that either becomes checked, or over we will never prosper in technology.

 Signature 

I am a leader and a Follower, for you can not be one without the other.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 December 2007 01:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  233
Joined  2007-10-18

-deleted-

[ Edited: 07 March 2011 04:25 PM by J.C.]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 December 2007 06:03 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1243
Joined  2006-12-26

Well, unfortunately, unsupervised and nonridiculed religionists will just re-fantasize and say that the mystery of the soul resides in the human DNA strand.

Even if we were able to synthesize a DNA-strand from nucleic acids without a matching DNA-template, they would switch and say the mystery lies in either the guanine or cytosine.

The only way to defeat the religionists are to continually, and systematically shame and ridicule them. Make them embarassed over their shoddy belief systems.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 December 2007 06:50 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  892
Joined  2007-12-04
arildno - 30 December 2007 11:03 AM

Well, unfortunately, unsupervised and nonridiculed religionists will just re-fantasize and say that the mystery of the soul resides in the human DNA strand.

Even if we were able to synthesize a DNA-strand from nucleic acids without a matching DNA-template, they would switch and say the mystery lies in either the guanine or cytosine.

The only way to defeat the religionists are to continually, and systematically shame and ridicule them. Make them embarassed over their shoddy belief systems.

Well the moment they try to move their metaphysical claims into the real world they are toast.
The only way the theists are able to defend themselves, however its not really defense its more like putting your fingers in your ears and screaming.

Anyway though, the only way the theists are able to “defend” themselves is to claim that certain entities does not exist in the material world. Like “god” and the “soul”.  I welcome any attempts they make of finding physical origins for their metaphysical claims in reality because it will only accomplish two things, 1) they will hopefully learn something about the real world while researching it, and 2) they will fail and make themselves look like fools, err bigger fools.

 Signature 

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed